California Trial Lawyers Journal, Volume 19California Trial Lawyers Association., 1981 - Law |
From inside the book
Results 1-3 of 9
Page 105
... completed in 1967 , but the homes were not substantially completed until 1972. In March of 1978 , rains caused earth movement , and plaintiffs ' home was damaged . Plaintiffs thereafter filed a complaint against the developer of the ...
... completed in 1967 , but the homes were not substantially completed until 1972. In March of 1978 , rains caused earth movement , and plaintiffs ' home was damaged . Plaintiffs thereafter filed a complaint against the developer of the ...
Page 106
... completed its work . The Court of Appeals agreed with the grading subcontractor , and held that the action against it was barred having been brought more than ten years after the time it had substantially completed its subdivision ...
... completed its work . The Court of Appeals agreed with the grading subcontractor , and held that the action against it was barred having been brought more than ten years after the time it had substantially completed its subdivision ...
Page 107
... completed in 1980. In 1994 , ( or any time within ten years after the developer has substantially completed its work ) , the hypothetical plaintiff suffers damage because of soil subsidance caused by improper grading . Plaintiff files ...
... completed in 1980. In 1994 , ( or any time within ten years after the developer has substantially completed its work ) , the hypothetical plaintiff suffers damage because of soil subsidance caused by improper grading . Plaintiff files ...
Contents
Arne Werchick Esq San Francisco | 9 |
Is the Danger Excessive | 33 |
The Trial of a Medical Malpractice Case | 63 |
5 other sections not shown
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
accident attorney award Barker barred benefit plan breast cancer Cal.Rptr California Supreme Court cause Civil Procedure claims Code of Civil compensation consumer cost counsel CTLA curling iron defendant defendant's deposition design defect determine developer doctor employee ERISA established evaluation Evidence Code expert witness filed foreseeable future damages Hahn hazards hospital hypothetical question indemnity action independent contractor injured worker instructions involved issue judgment jurors jury Labor Code Section legislative Liptak litigation lump manufacturer medical expert medical malpractice medical records motion negligence opinion pain party patient periodic payments physician plaintiff premises presented prior Products Liability reasonable res ipsa result risk Rptr rule safety engineering San Francisco special employer special employment standard statute of limitations statute of repose strict liability subcontractor substantially completed Superior Court supra testify testimony tion tort trial court Trial Lawyers trier of fact utilized verdict victim voir dire Warning