Legal Opinion

Nicolosi v. Clark

California Supreme Court

Decided March 31, 1915No. Sac. No. 2174PublishedCited by 21 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

The complaint charged that the defendant was a street contractor, and in pursuance of his business was engaged under a contract with the city of Sacramento in excavating a sewer trench in one of the streets of that city; that during the progress of this work the roadbed and sidewalks were open to the traveling public; that in the prosecution of his work defendant kept upon this street a large box used for storing tools and implements; that this box was standing within three feet of the sidewalk; that there was kept in this large box a small box containing dynamite caps; that plaintiff,…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Peters v. BowmanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896
  2. Pierce v. United Gas and Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Barrett v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1891
  4. Cahill v. E. B. & A. L. Stone & Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
  5. Loftus v. DehailCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Routh v. QuinnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  2. Hale v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
  3. Faylor v. Great Eastern Quicksilver Mining Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. Lambert v. Southern Counties Gas Co.California Supreme Court · 1959
  5. Knight v. Kaiser Co.California Supreme Court · 1957

16 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