Legal Opinion

Dimmick v. Alvarez

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 11, 1961No. Civ. 19237PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKaufman, P. J.

Plaintiffs, Floyd Dimmick and his wife, Lillian, appeal from a judgment in their favor entered on a jury verdict, in their actions for property damage and personal injuries, and from the denial of their motion for a new trial. They contend that a new trial on the issue of damages should be granted to plaintiff, Lillian Dimmick, as the damages awarded are inadequate as a matter of law, and that both plaintiffs are entitled to a new trial because of conversation which occurred during the trial between defense counsel and members of the jury.

Turning first to the purported appeal from the order…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Bauman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  2. Gersick v. ShillingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  3. Taylor v. PoleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1940
  4. Gimbel v. LaramieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1960
  5. Reeves v. ReevesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. People v. HoneycuttCalifornia Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Morris v. McCauley's Quality Transmission ServiceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
  3. McAllister v. GeorgeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1977
  4. Miller v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co.California Court of Appeal · 1963
  5. Ward v. LitowskyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970

6 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