Oldenburg v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtFox, J.
While walking on the sidewalk adjacent to one of defendant’s stores, plaintiff stepped on a piece of chalk. It rolled and caused her to fall. She sued defendant for damages for the injuries thus sustained. The jury returned a verdict in her favor. Defendant appeals from the judgment and the order denying its motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
In seeking a reversal defendant (sometimes herein referred to as Sears) contends that the evidence fails to show that it was either responsible for the chalk being on the sidewalk, or that it had either actual or constructive notice of its…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Estate of TeedCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952
- Moore v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Hatfield v. Levy BrothersCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Hamilton v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1939
- Tuttle v. CrawfordCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- Shaw v. County of Santa CruzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2008
- Sonic Manufacturing Technologies, Inc. v. AAE Systems, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Brown v. Poway Unified School DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1993
- Santa Clara County Department of Family & Children's Services v. D.W.California Court of Appeal · 2009
- Campbell v. MaganaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.