Legal Opinion

Green v. Southern Pacific Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided December 7, 1898No. L. A. No. 393PublishedCited by 43 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Santa Barbara County and from an order denying- a new trial. B. T„ Williams, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtVan Fleet, J.

Action by the widow and children of George E". Green to recover damages suffered by them as heirs at law of said George El Green, through his death, alleged to-have been occasioned by defendant’s negligence. Plaintiffs had judgment, and defendant appeals therefrom and from an order denying a new trial.

It will not be necessary to notice the ground of contributory negligence by deceased, urged by appellant, nor that of excessive damages, since those questions will not necessarily arise upon another trial, and the judgment and order must be reversed because of errors of law occurring at the…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Pennsylvania Co. v. RoySupreme Court of the United States · 1880
  2. Harrison v. Sutter Street RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad v. JohnsonIllinois Supreme Court · 1882
  4. Holmes v. South Pacific Coast RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Morgan v. Southern Pac. Co.California Supreme Court · 1892

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by43 opinions

  1. People v. GreenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1980
  2. People v. AntickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1975
  3. Green v. Los Angeles Terminal Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Mize v. Rocky Mountain Bell Telephone Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1909
  5. State v. EllisonNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1914

38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API