Legal Opinion

Dunlavy v. Nead

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 9, 1940No. Civ. 6241PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTuttle, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries arising out of alleged negligence of respondents. Upon a trial before the court, judgment was rendered for respondents, and appellant now appeals from such judgment.

Respondent Nead conducts a machine shop in the city of Sonora. This shop consists of the building where work is performed. At the rear of such building there is a door which opens into an area where respondent deposited junk from his shop, including scrap iron, bolts and nuts of various sizes. On the date of the accident appellant went to said shop for the purpose of…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Herbert v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Hoff v. Los Angeles Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  3. Hamakawa v. Crescent Wharf & Warehouse Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  4. Faras v. Lower California Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1915
  5. Lewis v. LewisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Huffman v. LindquistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Newman v. Fox West Coast TheatresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  3. Miller v. Desilu Productions, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1962
  4. Huffman v. LindquistCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API