Legal Opinion

Ahrens v. Anderson

Washington Supreme Court

Decided May 4, 1936No. 26011. Department OnePublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSteinert, J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries sustained by a pedestrian who was struck by an automobile. Trial by a jury resulted in a verdict for defendant. From an order granting plaintiffs’ motion for new trial, the defendant has appealed.

There are three assignments of error: (1) that the court erred in overruling appellant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence at the close of respondents’ case; (2) that the court erred in refusing to grant appellant’s motion to dismiss the case at the conclusion of all the testimony given at the trial; and (3) that the court erred in…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Olsen v. Peerless LaundryWashington Supreme Court · 1920
  2. Norland v. PetersonWashington Supreme Court · 1932
  3. Huntington v. Clallam Grain Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Bell v. Northwest Cities Gas Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Davis v. RiegelWashington Supreme Court · 1935

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Beck v. DyeWashington Supreme Court · 1939
  2. State v. McDanielsWashington Supreme Court · 1948
  3. Estill v. BerryWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Lindberg v. SteeleWashington Supreme Court · 1940
  5. Mathisen v. NortonWashington Supreme Court · 1936

14 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