Legal Opinion
Driscoll v. Shipp
California Court of Appeal
Decided April 30, 1936No. Civ. 10789; Civ. 10798PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
McCOMB, J., pro tem.
These are appeals consolidated by consent of all parties from judgments for the defendant after trial by a jury in actions to recover damages for the wrong ful death of plaintiff’s son, John J. Driscoll, Jr., and for personal injuries to plaintiff’s son, David A. Driscoll.
Viewing the evidence most favorable to the defendant (Ah Gett v. Carr, 3 Cal. App. 47, 48 [84 Pac. 458]), the facts in the instant cases are:
Where San Vicente Boulevard and Cochran Avenue cross in the city of Los Angeles the intersection consists of two roadways along San Vicente Boulevard, each roadway…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Leavens v. Pinkham & McKevittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Thatch v. LivingstonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Keyes v. HawleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
- Page v. MazzeiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Kienlen v. HoltCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Mays v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.Supreme Court of Kansas · 1983
- Blanton v. CurryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Osgood v. City of San DiegoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Westcott v. HamiltonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962
- Cruzen v. WilcoxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.