Onell v. Chappell
California Court of Appeal
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtLennon, P. J.
This was an action to recover damages for personal injuries resulting* from a collision between defendant’s automobile and a wagon of the plaintiff.
In this case the trial court applied the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, and instructed the jury in effect that it is the law that “when a thing that caused the injury is shown to be under the management of the defendant, and the accident is such as in the ordinary course of things does not happen if those who have the management use proper care, it affords reasonable evidence in the absence of explanation by the defendant, that the accident arose…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Ross v. Cotton Mills.Supreme Court of North Carolina · 1905
- Cody v. Market St. Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
- Bauhofer v. CrawfordCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
3Cited by7 opinions
- Scarborough v. UrgoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Dowd v. Atlas Taxicab & Auto Service Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
- Crooks v. WhiteCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Brown v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
- Fahey v. MaddenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.