Carr v. Sacramento Clay Products Co.
California Court of Appeal
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, and from an order denying a new trial. Martin I. Welsh, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtBurnett, J.
The action was for damages resulting from an injury suffered by plaintiff through the negligence of de-' fendant. The cause was tried before the court without a jury, and the plaintiff was awarded the sum of seven thousand five hundred dollars, and the appeal is from the judgment and order denying the motion for a new trial. It is not disputed that the evidence was sufficient to justify a finding that the defendant was negligent as charged in the complaint. In fact, the court found that it was a case of gross negligence, and this finding is not attacked. There is no claim that plaintiff was…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Cahill v. Superior Court of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1904
- Perkins v. Sunset Tel. and Tel. Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
- Union Pacific Railway Co. v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1895
- The Edward Barron Estate Co. v. the Woodruff Co.California Supreme Court · 1912
- Chase v. ChaseSupreme Court of Rhode Island · 1897
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- Winget v. RockwoodCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1934
- Hellman Commercial Trust & Savings Bank v. AldenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
- Graham v. Atchison. T. & S. F. Ry. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1949
- Jordan v. GuerraCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Bennett v. DeatonIdaho Supreme Court · 1937
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.