Legal Opinion

Courtell v. McEachen

California Supreme Court

Decided February 2, 1959No. L. A. 24383PublishedCited by 65 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*453GIBSON, C. J.

Defendants, Mrs. McEachen and the administrator of the estate of her deceased husband, appeal from a judgment in the amount of $50,000 recovered by plaintiff as damages for severe burns she sustained while playing on a lot owned by the McEachens in joint tenancy.

A house had been torn down on the lot where the accident happened, and early in 1953 Mr. McEachen, who managed the real property of the couple, engaged Harry Plummer to burn the lumber and debris, which covered the lot. Plummer, an evening-shift worker in a tire factory, was a tenant of the McEachens, renting a house next…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Satterlee v. Orange Glenn School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Oettinger v. StewartCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Empire Star Mines Co. v. California Employment CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Snyder v. Southern California Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Cahill v. E. B. & A. L. Stone Co.California Supreme Court · 1914

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

3Cited by65 opinions

  1. Van Arsdale v. HollingerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Walters v. SloanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  3. Woolen v. Aerojet General CorporationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
  4. Haft v. Lone Palm HotelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Phillips v. G. L. Truman Excavation Co.California Supreme Court · 1961

60 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