Legal Opinion
Miller v. Midway Fishing Tool Co.
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 25, 1951No. Civ. 18201PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
HANSON, J. pro tem.
The only question presented by this appeal is whether the trial court erred in receiving evidence as to the customary preliminary inspection made of drilling pipe hoists by oil equipment rental companies at the time the hoists were rented to drilling concerns.
The respondent who was the defendant below is engaged in the business of supplying oil well tools and equipment to oil drilling concerns upon a rental basis. The defendant leased to the employer of appellant what is known in the oil industry as a “handling elevator.” It is used to hoist oil well steel easing upwards in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Phoenix Assurance Co. v. Texas Holding Co.California Court of Appeal · 1927
- Burke v. John E. Marshall, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1940
- Hennesey v. BinghamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Johnson v. Western Air Express Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1941
- Thomas v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Blank v. Palo Alto-Stanford Hospital CenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Varas v. Barco Manufacturing Co.California Court of Appeal · 1962
- Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Bank of AmericaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
- McNeal v. GreenbergCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Schmitt v. Northern Improvement CompanyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1962
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.