Legal Opinion

Evarts v. Santa Barbara Consolidated Railway Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 1, 1906No. Civ. No. 205PublishedCited by 18 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtAllen, J.

Action for damages on account of alleged negligence. Judgment for plaintiffs, from which defendant appeals.

The case was tried by a jury upon the testimony of the plaintiffs’ witnesses alone, the defendant submitting no evidence. The evidence on the part of plaintiffs tended to show that defendant has caused an excavation to be made in a public street in the city of Santa Barbara, and suffered the same to remain open and unguarded and without signal lights to warn travelers of the danger. That Dr. Evarts, a man about forty-four years of age, a practicing physician, who had engaged in such…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Harrison v. Sutter Street RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  2. Dyas v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  3. Storrs v. Los Angeles Traction Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
  4. Cederberg v. RobisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Lange v. SchoettlerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1896

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Mize v. Rocky Mountain Bell Telephone Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Anderson v. Great Northern Railway Co.Idaho Supreme Court · 1908
  3. Simoneau v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  4. Licudine v. Cedars-Sinai Medical CenterCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. Goldstein v. SklarSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1966

13 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