Legal Opinion

Rohar v. Osborne

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 31, 1955No. Civ. 20626PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWhite, P. J.

Plaintiff instituted this action to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly sustained as a result of the negligence of defendants.

Defendants Henry P. Osborne, Sr., and H. P. Osborne, Jr., operated a hardware store known as Shank’s Economy Store. Defendant Iíer-0-Kil Manufacturing Company, a corporation, was the manufacturer of the weed burner which was the instrumentality by which plaintiff was injured. Trial by jury resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of ICerO-ICil Manufacturing Company, makers of the instrumentality causing the injury and in favor of plaintiff against…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Zentz v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.California Supreme Court · 1952
  2. Rae v. California Equipment Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
  3. McNeal v. GreenbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  4. Monroe v. East Bay Rental ServiceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
  5. Rainbow Petroleum Co. v. Union Drilling & Petroleum Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Tierstein v. LichtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  2. Holmes Packaging MacH. Corp. v. BinghamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1967
  3. Tucson General Hospital v. RussellCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API