Legal Opinion

Billingsley v. Rovig-Temple Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 12, 1943No. 28750PublishedCited by 50 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSteinert, J.

— This is an action to recover damages for injuries to person and property resulting from an automobile collision. The cause was tried to a jury, and at the close of plaintiff’s case defendants challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and moved for a non-suit. The challenge was overruled and the motion was denied. On submission of the case to the jury, a verdict was returned in favor of the plaintiff. Defendants thereafter moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and this likewise was denied. Judgment for plaintiff was then entered, and defendants appealed.

The assignments of error…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Martin v. HadenfeldtWashington Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Richardson v. Pacific Power & Light Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1941
  3. Pierce v. Pacific Mutual Life Insurance Co. of CaliforniaWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Moen v. ChestnutWashington Supreme Court · 1941
  5. Hefner v. PatteeWashington Supreme Court · 1939

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

3Cited by50 opinions

  1. Kellerher v. PorterWashington Supreme Court · 1948
  2. Shultes v. HalpinWashington Supreme Court · 1949
  3. French v. ChaseWashington Supreme Court · 1956
  4. Williams v. HoferWashington Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Yeager v. DunnavanWashington Supreme Court · 1946

45 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