Legal Opinion

McCulloch v. Horton

Montana Supreme Court

Decided April 6, 1936No. 7,510PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This case was brought and tried on the theory that plaintiff was and acted as an invitee of defendant. Defendant opposed that theory and contended plaintiff at most was a mere licensee and defendant owed him no greater duty than to refrain from inflicting on him wilful or wanton injury. We contend the undisputed evidence shows that plaintiff was on the premises of defendant and at the garage thereon as an invitee of defendant and that he did as an invitee all he did, and that his presence and acts could be nothing but those of an invitee.

Manifestly, an invitee is one who is invited, expressly…

2Cases cited97 opinions

  1. City of Tulsa v. HarmanSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1931
  2. Comeau v. ComeauMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  3. Lonergan v. American Railway Express Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1924
  4. Robinson v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1927
  5. Higgins v. MasonNew York Court of Appeals · 1930

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Teesdale v. Anschutz Drilling CompanyMontana Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Burns v. FisherMontana Supreme Court · 1957
  3. Gilligan v. City of ButteMontana Supreme Court · 1946
  4. Holland v. KondaMontana Supreme Court · 1963
  5. Hickman v. First Nat. Bk. of Great FallsMontana Supreme Court · 1941

20 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