Legal Opinion

Manning v. City of Pasadena

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 4, 1922No. Civ. No. 4227PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSturtevant, J.

The plaintiff, by his guardian, brought an action against the defendant, the city of Pasadena, to recover a judgment in damages for personal injuries which the plaintiff alleged he had suffered. Judgment went for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed.

The appellant makes several points, including the contention that the defendant, the city of Pasadena, is not liable for acts of negligence on the part of its employees occurring in the performance of a governmental duty, and that the alleged injuries occurred under such circumstances. The respondent concedes that the defendant would not…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Melvin v. StateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Denning v. StateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Chapman v. StateCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
  4. Kellar v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  5. Hourigan v. City of NorwichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Ashbury v. City of NorfolkSupreme Court of Virginia · 1929
  2. Pittam v. City of RiversideCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. Davis v. City of Santa AnaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  4. Griffin v. County of ColusaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Oklahoma City v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1928

11 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