Skip to main content
· 5/20/1891

Willis v. McMahan

Citations

  • 89 Cal. 156
  • 26 P. 649
  • 1891 Cal. LEXIS 791

Syllabus

<p>Innkeeper—Refusal to Receive Guest — Benefit from Mineral Springs — Evidence. —In an action against an innkeeper for damages for refusal to entertain the plaintiff at the inn, thereby preventing him from receiving benefit from mineral springs owned by the innkeeper, where the evidence shows that the water of the springs was the principal inducement to visitors of the hotel, and was the sole inducement to the plaintiff, who was an invalid, and had been entertained at the hotel before, and benefited by the water, and had visited the springs hoping to he benefited'again, it is not error for the court to allow the plaintiff to testify that preventing him from using the water had a very injurious effect upon his health.</p> <p>Id.—Instruction — Furnishing Mineral Water.—The injury to the plaintiff being the refusal of entertainment at the hotel, and, in consequence, the use of the water, it was not error for the trial court to refuse to instruct the jury that the innkeepers were not hound to furnish the water of the spring, where there was no evidence that they refused to allow the plaintiff the use of it.</p>

Judges: Temple

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.