Legal Opinion

Arnaz v. Forbes

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 5, 1921No. Civ. No. 2963PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtJames, J.

This action was brought to recover damages alleged to have been suffered by the plaintiff by reason of the negligent acts of the defendant in the handling and driving of an automobile. The case was tried before the court without a jury and' judgment entered in favor of the plaintiff. From that judgment defendant appeals. Defendant in his answer pleaded that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence which was the proximate cause of his injuries. The court failed to make a finding upon this plea and that omission constitutes the sole claim for a reversal.

[1] The law imposes upon a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Winslow v. GohransenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Maloof v. MaloofCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Brenning v. RemingtonNebraska Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Genola v. BarnettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  3. Platt v. OkamotoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
  4. Ohlson v. CallenderCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

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

Powered by the Exa API