Martin

Martin v. Stone

Good Law
10 Cal. Rptr. 184·187 Cal. App. 2d 726·1960 Cal. App. LEXIS 1448
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 27, 1960Civ. No. 24697California1,709 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Herndon, J.

Plaintiff brought an action for damages for personal injuries allegedly caused by the defendants’ negligence. The court, sitting without a jury, found that defendants Stone were not negligent and that, although defendant Colich Construction Company had been negligent, the plaintiff had been guilty of negligence which contributed proximately to the accident. It is from the judgment in favor of defendants Colich that plaintiff appeals.

The parties have proceeded by means of a settled statement on appeal under rule 7, Rules on Appeal. The following is a brief narrative of the facts presented in that statement. The plaintiff was employed as a plumber by Joseph Plumbing Company and, on March 20, 1956, was working on a residential tract development in Culver City. Defendant Colich Construction Company was engaged in certain excavation work on the same project and defendant Stone & Stone was the general contractor in charge of the project. Plaintiff had *728 been directed by his employer to follow the instructions of Leo Stone.

The plaintiff was instructed by Stone to repair a temporary water pipe which had been accidentally ruptured during an excavation by Colieh. Thereupon,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.