Legal Opinion
Pilger v. City of Paris Dry Goods Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 24, 1927No. Docket No. 6000PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
CAMPBELL, J., pro tem.
T his is an appeal from a judgment based upon a motion for nonsuit made by defendant at the close of plaintiff’s case.
The facts disclosed by the evidence are as follows: The respondent, The City of Paris, a corporation, is a retail store in the -city of San Francisco, dealing in dry goods and- various kinds of merchandise and having different departments. In the month of September, 1923, appellant, Lucy Pilger, employed the services of Dr. Robbins, a chiropodist, who had an office in the store of respondent corporation and whose office adjoined the beauty parlor…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Matter of Co-Operative Law Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1910
- Hannon v. . Siegel-Cooper Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1901
- McColligan v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1906
- Boswell v. LairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1857
- People v. John H. Woodbury Dermatological InstituteNew York Court of Appeals · 1908
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Moody v. Industrial Accident CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
- Inderbitzen v. Lane HospitalCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
- Pacific Employers Insurance Co. v. CarpenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Hedlund v. Sutter Medical Service Co.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Accounting Corp. of America v. State Board of AccountancyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.