Russo

Russo v. Burch

Good Law
1964 Cal. App. LEXIS 1481·224 Cal. App. 2d 403·36 Cal. Rptr. 682·23 A.L.R. 3d 353
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 1964Civ. No. 21124California5,033 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Molinari, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant in an action for damages for personal injuries. The questions presented are as follows:

(1) Did the trial court commit prejudicial error in failing to instruct as to the duty owed by a landlord to an invitee of the tenant ?

(2) Did the trial court commit prejudicial error in instructing the jury that “Walking through an unlighted, unfamiliar area in the dark constitutes negligent conduct”?

(3) Did the trial court commit prejudicial error in making certain comments in the presence of the jury ?

The pertinent facts of the case are as follows: On December 10, 1958, between 5 and 5:30 p.m., plaintiff visited the dwelling of Mrs. Norma DiTano, a voice coach, for the purpose of securing certain musical instruction. This dwelling was one of two flats, known as 3043-3045 Octavia Street, San Francisco, which were owned by defendant. Mrs. DiTano was the tenant occupying 3043. Another family occupied 3045. Access to both flats was gained through a doorway in the front of the building on Octavia Street. The doorway led to a courtyard some 6 feet wide and 10 feet in length. At the opposite end of the courtyard there were 6 steps…

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.