Legal Opinion

Holden v. Chunestudey

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 6, 1980No. Civ. 18147PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BLEASE, J.

Gary

Plaintiff, GaryD. Holden, appeals from the summary judgment granted to defendant, Joseph E. Chunestudey, in plaintiff’s personal injury action.

The issue on appeal is whether the fireman’s rule, which under Walters v. Sloan (1977) 20 Cal.3d 199 [142 Cal.Rptr. 152, 571 P.2d 609] precludes recovery by a policeman for injuries proximately caused by the negligent conduct of someone within the scope of the policeman’s investigational or other duties, extends to willful or wanton misconduct. We so hold.

I

For purposes of this appeal the relevant facts on review of the summary…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Taylor v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
  2. Walters v. SloanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Solgaard v. Guy F. Atkinson Co.California Supreme Court · 1971
  4. Hall v. C & a Navarra Ranch, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1972

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Lipson v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1982
  2. Mahoney v. Carus Chemical Co., Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1986
  3. Hubbard v. BoeltCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Young v. Sherwin-Williams Co., Inc.District of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1990
  5. Kocan v. GarinoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1980

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

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

Powered by the Exa API