Legal Opinion
Hyams v. Simoncelli
California Court of Appeal
Decided October 11, 1940No. Civ. 11079; Civ. 11089PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, P. J.
Three separate proceedings are pending in this court between the above-mentioned parties, all growing out of an automobile accident in which plaintiff was injured by an automobile owned by defendants as copartners. The first of these (No. 11079) is an appeal by the defendants from a judgment for plaintiff for the injuries so received. The second of these (No. 11089) is an appeal by defendants from an order of the trial court made after judgment on January 18, 1939, denying defendants’ motions for a new trial and to vacate certain orders. The third proceeding is a motion by plaintiff to…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Flores v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1936
- Gloria v. a Colonia PortuguesaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933
- Bourne v. MooreUtah Supreme Court · 1930
- Harris v. SpeirsUtah Supreme Court · 1920
- Plecas v. DevichUtah Supreme Court · 1928
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Jacuzzi v. Jacuzzi Bros., Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1966
- People v. Gin ShueCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- LeBlanc v. BrowneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Chapman v. Municipal CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- McDonald v. RandolphCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.