Legal Opinion · Dissent

Taylor v. Hawkinson

California Supreme Court

Decided February 8, 1957No. L. A. 24279Published

1DissentCarter, J.

I dissent.

I cannot agree that a judgment, which on its face determines the question of liability in a negligence action, is not res judicata on that issue by way of collateral estoppel in another action on the theory that the question of liability was not decided because the jury in the first action assertedly compromised on the issue of liability. Whatever way you cut it, the result reached by the majority is that an alleged compromise verdict (balancing liability against the amount of damages) is subject to collateral attack on that ground.

The facts are not involved and some legal points…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. Lawlor v. National Screen Service Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1955
  2. United States v. International Building Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1953
  3. Brown v. BrownCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  4. Stark v. CokerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  5. Burtnett v. KingCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949

37 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