Legal Opinion

Linforth v. S.F. Gas and Electric Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided July 6, 1909No. S.F. No. 4838PublishedCited by 42 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.

Plaintiff sued to recover damages for injuries to his property, a building in the city and county of San Francisco. The defendant supplied illuminating gas to the building. Its negligence, as alleged, was in its failure to maintain in suitable condition its pipes, meters, connections, and couplings. By reason of this failure gas was permitted to and did escape, and collected in large quantities between the walls, floors, and studding in the building and finally exploded with consequent injury to the building. The answer does not raise a direct issue to the effect that the explosion was not…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Munro v. Pacific Coast Dredging & Reclamation Co.California Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Fitz Simons & Connell Co. v. Braun & FittsIllinois Supreme Court · 1902
  3. Kansas City, Memphis & Birmingham Railroad v. CrockerSupreme Court of Alabama · 1891
  4. Colton v. OnderdonkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1886
  5. People v. Sing YowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904

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

3Cited by42 opinions

  1. Davis v. HearstCalifornia Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Natural Soda Products Co. v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Stanley Co. of America v. Hercules Powder Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1954
  4. May v. FarrellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  5. Geddes & Smith, Inc. v. Saint Paul Mercury Indemnity Co.California Supreme Court · 1965

37 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