plaintiff cannot invoke doctrine (California) · Go Syfert
← California issues

plaintiff cannot invoke doctrine in California

5 California opinions name it 2 courts 1918–1957 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Fleharty v. Boltzengreen
calctapp · 1955 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1957–1957
2 sentences

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

11
Rodabaugh v. Tekusgreen
cal · 1952 · cited in 1 California opinions naming this issue, 1957–1957
2 sentences

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

CaseCitedYears
Dalley v. Williams green
calctapp · 1946
2 sentences

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

21955–1957
Lippert v. Pacific Sugar Corporation green
calctapp · 1917
2 sentences

1939We think, however, that this question is foreclosed in this state by the doctrine of the case of Lippert v. Pacific Sugar Corporation, 33 Cal. App. 198 [ 164 Pac. 810 ].

1939We think, however, that this question is foreclosed in this state by the doctrine of the case of Lippert v. Pacific Sugar Corporation, 33 Cal. App. 198 [ 164 Pac. 810 ].

21918–1939
Doran v. City & County of San Francisco green
cal · 1955
1 sentence

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

11957–1957
Bonebrake v. McCormick green
cal · 1950
2 sentences

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

1957As was said in Dalley v. Williams, supra, 73 Cal.App.2d 427 . at page 435 [ 166 P.2d 595 ], ‘the term “place of safety” ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is *116 only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. ’ ” (Doran v. City & County of San Francisco, supra, 44 Cal.2d at p. 489 .) Applicable here is the quotation from Rodabaugh v. Tekus, 39 Cal.2d 290, 295 [ 246 P.2d 663 ], appearing in Fleharty v. Boltzen, 137 Cal.App.2d 187, 191 [ 290 P.2d 311 ]: “

11957–1957
Schouten v. Crawford green
calctapp · 1953
2 sentences

1956Then, and not until then, was the last clear chance doctrine applicable.’ “It has been likewise held that the term ‘place of safety’ ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. [Citing three cases.] While a person may be in danger or peril, i. e., while he may be simply exposed to injury, that is not enough to constitute a position of danger within the meaning of the last clear chance doctrine, and in order to com

1956Then, and not until then, was the last clear chance doctrine applicable.’ “It has been likewise held that the term ‘place of safety’ ordinarily includes the position of the plaintiff while he is merely approaching the place of danger, and so long as he is only approaching but is not actually in a position of danger, the plaintiff cannot invoke the doctrine. [Citing three cases.] While a person may be in danger or peril, i. e., while he may be simply exposed to injury, that is not enough to constitute a position of danger within the meaning of the last clear chance doctrine, and in order to com

11956–1956

Where else courts name it

CA 5 (1918–1957) NY 2 (1925–2007) SC 2 (1986–1989)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check