Legal Opinion

Stadler v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided December 24, 1913No. Civ. 1419PublishedCited by 3 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.

Action to recover damages for the death of plaintiff’s intestate, Mary J. Quesenberry, which is alleged to have occurred in an accident due to defendant’s negligence in the operation of its electric ears.

The case was tried before a jury which brought in a verdict for defendant. Judgment followed; plaintiff moved for a new trial, which motion was denied, and he appeals from said order denying his motion.

The facts, so far as required to elucidate the alleged errors, are as follows: At the time of the accident defendant was the owner and engaged as a common carrier of passengers in the operation…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Harrison v. Sutter Street RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Cragg v. Los Angeles Trust Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Cooper v. Los Angeles Terminal RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1902

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dodge v. San Diego Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1949
  2. Garrison v. PearlsteinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  3. Mac Gregor v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API