Legal Opinion

Petroff v. Nunes

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 21, 1932No. Docket No. 3993PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMPSON (R. L.), J.

This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial in the above-entitled consolidated actions after a judgment in favor of the defendant which was rendered in an automobile casualty.

On December 28, 1927, at 11 o’clock in the forenoon, the defendant was driving his Essex automobile easterly along the public highway between Vacaville and Dixon. He was accompanied by the three plaintiffs, who were riding with him as his guests. They were going duck hunting. It had been raining. The pavement was wet. There is a conflict of testimony regarding the essential facts of the case.…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Smellie v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Krause v. RarityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. McCoy v. KrengelIdaho Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Petroff v. NunesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  3. Charles Lomori & Son v. Globe LaboratoriesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. Franklin v. BettencourtCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  5. Walters v. Du FourCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1933

1 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