WATERMAN v. LIEDERMAN (1936)

Supreme Court of California.

WATERMAN v. LIEDERMAN et al.

Civ. 9871.

Decided: November 13, 1936

Livingston & Livingston, of San Francisco, for appellant. Myrick & Deering and Scott, of San Francisco, for respondent J. H. Liederman. Haight, Trippet & Syvertson, of Los Angeles, for respondent Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. of California.

The petition for hearing in this court, after decision by the District Court of Appeal, First Appellate District, Division 2 (60 P.(2d) 881), is denied. However, we withhold our approval of that portion of the opinion declaring that plaintiff failed to make out a cause of action against the manufacturer by reason of the intervening gross carelessness of the driver, not because it is an incorrect statement of the law, but because the driver was exonerated of such charges, hence it cannot operate as an intervening cause to relieve the manufacturer.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law