Todd v. Cochell

Citations

• 17 Cal. 97

Syllabus

<p>In an action for injuries to a garden, occasioned by the breaking of a reservoir, the Court instructed the jury, that to entitle plaintiff to recover, it must appear that the breaking of the reservoir resulted from the gross negligence of defendants ; and then proceeded to explain that defendants must have taken the same care of their reservoir, and of the water in it, as they would have done, being prudent men, had the garden of plaintiff been their property; and that otherwise, they had been guilty of gross negligence, and were liable in damages: Held, that although the instruction without the explanation was wrong, still, with the explanation it was right, and could not have misled the jury.</p>