Legal Opinion
Coughman v. Harman
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 6, 1933No. Docket No. 4847PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPlummer, J.
The plaintiff in this action, the widow of D. A. Coughman, deceased, had judgment against the defendant in the sum of $5,000 damages for the death of said D. A. Coughman, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant. From this judgment the defendant appeals.
The appeal is also taken from the denial of the defendant’s motion for a new trial. As no appeal lies from an order denying a motion for new trial, the appeal, in so far as it purports to he taken from such denial, is hereby dismissed.
The complaint alleges that on or about the thirtieth day of December, 1931, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Smellie v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
- Parsons v. EastonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Cooley v. Brunswig Drug Co.California Court of Appeal · 1916
- Fahey v. MaddenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1922
- Hamblin v. SchultisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
3Cited by10 opinions
- Linde v. EmmickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Scalf v. EicherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- People v. FreemanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Brown v. BoehmCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Temple v. De MirjianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.