Haviland v. Southern California Edison Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Morton, Hollzer & Morton, H. H. Trowbridge, T. A. Williams, and P. M. Fowler, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtSloss, J.
In this action, brought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the defendant’s negligence, there was a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for fifteen thousand dollars. The defendant appeals from the judgment. The grounds relied on for reversal appear in a bill of exceptions which was settled by the court below over the respondent’s objection.
It is urged that the bill should not have been settled, and that it cannot be considered on this appeal. This contention, if sustained, would necessarily lead to an affirmance without any examination of the substantial…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Upton v. TribilcockSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Stonesifer v. KilburnCalifornia Supreme Court · 1892
- Smith v. Occidental & Oriental Steamship Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
- Meyer v. HaasCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Champion v. WoodsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Jorgensen v. JorgensenCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
- Casey v. ProctorCalifornia Supreme Court · 1963
- Solomon v. First American National Bank of NashvilleCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 1989
- Edwards v. Comstock Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1988
- Flores v. Board of Supervisors of Los Angeles CountyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.