Legal Opinion
Art Kirchner and Edie Kirchner v. Chattanooga Choo Choo, a Hawaiian Limited Partnership
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Decided November 30, 1993No. 92-6346PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOHN P. MOORE, Circuit Judge.
Art Kirchner fell on ice outside his apartment and sued his landlord, Chattanooga Choo Choo, for damages. At trial, the jury-decided against Mr. Kirchner on his common law claim but for him on his claim under the Oklahoma Residential Landlord and Tenant Act, Okla.Stat. tit. 41, §§ 101-136 (1991) (the Act). The court subsequently granted defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the statutory claim. Mr. Kirchner appeals arguing the Oklahoma statute alters the common law by increasing the duty a landlord owes tenants and provides a tort remedy…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Tate v. Browning-Ferris, Inc.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1992
- Holbert v. EcheverriaSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1987
- Mountain Fuel Supply, a Utah Corporation, and Cna Insurance Company v. Reliance Insurance CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1991
- Bank of America v. John M. WebsterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1971
- Weatherall v. YORKTOWN HOMEOWNER'S ASS'NCourt of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 1993
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Essex Insurance Company v. VincentCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995
- City of Hugo v. State Ex Rel. Public Employees Relations BoardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1994
- Helmer v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2016
- Essex Insurance v. VincentCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1995