Legal Opinion

Clark v. Tarr

Idaho Supreme Court

Decided May 13, 1954No. 8127PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GIVENS, Justice.

A general demurrer to appellant’s second amended • complaint was sustained and consequent judgment of dismissal entered, on the theory the complaint did not state a cause of action because no negligence of the bus driver in making the transfer delineated in the complaint could proximately cause appellant’s injury; and lack of authority of the driver to bind his principal in the transaction narrated.

The salient allegations of the complaint, perforce admitted by the general demurrer, are:

' That September 10, 1953 appellant was a pay passenger in one of respondent Company’s buses…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Brady v. Chicago & G. W. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1902
  2. Stearns Ex Rel. Stearns v. GravesIdaho Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Burns v. GettyIdaho Supreme Court · 1933
  4. Murray v. Lehigh Valley RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1895
  5. Curtis v. Siebrand Bros. Circus & Carnival Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1948

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Smith v. SharpIdaho Supreme Court · 1960
  2. Clements v. JungertIdaho Supreme Court · 1965
  3. United States of America, and Union Pacific Railroad Company v. Isaac MarshallCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
  4. John Scowcroft & Sons Co. v. RoselleIdaho Supreme Court · 1955
  5. Russell v. City of Idaho FallsIdaho Supreme Court · 1956

7 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