Legal Opinion

Fitzpatrick v. Haskell

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 26, 1931No. Docket No. 516PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ALLISON, J., pro tem.

This action was tried before a jury. The plaintiff was awarded a judgment in the sum of $3,000 as damages for personal injuries sustained when an automobile operated by the defendants collided with an automobile driven by the plaintiff. The collision occurred on the twelfth day of July, 1926, at the intersection of Alvarado Street and Twelfth Street in the city of Los Angeles. From this judgment the defendants appeal.

It is first contended by the appellants that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict and judgment. Counsel’s argument in support of his…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Krause v. RarityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  2. Benjamin v. NoonanCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Waer v. WaerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Townsend v. KeithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1917
  5. A. L. Young MacHinery Co. v. CuppsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Morris v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Huber v. ScottCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  3. DeLuxe Box Lunch & Catering Co. v. BlackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API