Legal Opinion · Dissent

Hubbard v. Boelt

California Supreme Court

Decided December 15, 1980No. L.A. 31267Published

1DissentTobriner, J.

I dissented from this court’s decision in Walters v. Sloan (1977) 20 Cal.3d 199 [142 Cal.Rptr. 152, 571 P.2d 609] and I continue to believe that the “fireman’s rule” is inconsistent with California’s fundamental statutory and common law tort principles which require all persons to exercise due care to avoid injury to others. (See, e.g., Civ. Code, § 1714; Weirum v. RKO General, Inc. (1975) 15 Cal.3d 40, 46 [123 Cal.Rptr 468, 539 P.2d 36].) Consequently, I would vote to overrule Walters and to abrogate the fireman’s rule altogether.

Even accepting Walters as the governing authority, however,…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Weirum v. RKO General, Inc.California Supreme Court · 1975
  2. Witt v. JacksonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1961
  3. Krauth v. Israel Geller and Buckingham Homes, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1960
  4. Baugh v. RogersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Walters v. SloanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977

4 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