Legal Opinion

Caulfield v. Market Street Railway Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 6, 1937No. Civ. 10205PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COUBT.

by the plaintiff in an action for personal injuries from a judgment entered in her favor in the sum of $400.

The trial court denied her motion for a new trial, one of the grounds of which was the inadequacy of the award.

She alleged that she fell from a moving street car which was negligently operated by defendant company, and suffered certain physical injuries.

There was a conflict in the testimony as to the nature and extent of her injuries; and from that adduced by the defendant the jury was justified in finding that they were not serious or permanent.

It was testified that she lost…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Dewhirst v. LeopoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  2. Zimmer v. KilbornCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913
  3. Dreyer v. CyriacksCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  4. Davis v. FyfeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Muench v. GerskeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Bencich v. Market Street Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937
  2. Gersick v. ShillingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  3. Malinson v. BlackCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1948
  4. Burch v. Levy Bros. Box Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  5. Gridley v. Department of Mental HygieneCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1973

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