Legal Opinion

Gicking v. Kimberlin

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 16, 1985No. B005047PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment on jury verdict. We affirm.

Appellants sued respondents for damages as a result of a real property fire of unknown cause. During trial, appellant submitted both absolute and conditional res ipsa loquitur jury instructions. The court refused to give either instruction. The jury was given general negligence instructions. It rendered a judgment for respondents. Appellants' motion for a new trial was denied.

The issue on appeal is whether the court committed prejudicial error by refusing to give the res ipsa loquitur instructions. We find the evidence at…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Ybarra v. SpangardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Zentz v. Coca Cola Bottling Co.California Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Levy-Zentner Co. v. SOUTHERN PAC. TRANSPORTATIONCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Newing v. CheathamCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Fowler v. SeatonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1964

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Scott v. RAYHRERCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2010
  2. Jasmine Vineyards, Inc. v. D.R. Johnson Lumber Co.District Court, E.D. California · 2025

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

Powered by the Exa API