Legal Opinion
Armstrong v. Sengo
California Court of Appeal
Decided November 2, 1936No. Civ. 5426; Civ. 5427; Civ. 5428; Civ. 5429PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtThompson, J.
These four suits for damages growing out of the same automobile accident were consolidated for trial. From separate judgments which were rendered against the same defendants in each ease they have appealed. The four appeals are presented to this court upon one transcript of proceedings. The judgments against Tony Sengo, the owner of the machine, in no instance exceeds the amount limited by the provisions of section 1714¼ of the Civil Code. The several amounts of damages awarded are not challenged as excessive. The causes were tried by the court sitting without a jury.
There is a conflict of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sterling v. ConstantinSupreme Court of the United States · 1932
- Hughes v. QuackenbushCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
- Sutton v. TangerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
- Herlihy v. DonohueMontana Supreme Court · 1916
- Haggard v. FrickCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Hicks v. ReisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Burgess v. CahillCalifornia Supreme Court · 1945
- Fry v. YoungCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
- Davidson v. EaleyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
- Curnutt v. HolkCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.