Legal Opinion
Maple v. Cincinnati, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 3, 1985No. B003043PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
COMPTON, Acting P. J.
Defendant in a personal injury action appeals from an order granting plaintiff a new trial after a jury had returned a verdict in favor of defendant. We reverse.
Plaintiff George Maple suffered injuries while operating a press-brake machine during the course of his employment. The machine was manufactured by defendant Cincinnati, Inc. On May 16, 1983, after deliberating for two and one-half hours, the jury returned a nine-to-three verdict in favor of defendant. Judgment was immediately entered on the verdict.
Thereafter one of the jurors contacted plaintiff’s lawyer…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sitkei v. FrimelCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
- Johns v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1978
- Apostolos v. EstradaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1958
3Cited by5 opinions
- Smoketree-Lake Murray, Ltd. v. Mills Concrete Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1991
- Kabran v. Sharp Memorial Hosp.California Supreme Court · 2017
- Jones v. SieveCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1988
- Fredrics v. PaigeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1994
- Ford v. BennackaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990