Legal Opinion

Lusardi v. Prukop

California Court of Appeal

Decided September 4, 1931No. Docket No. 7811PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WARD, J., pro tem.

These are actions for personal injuries consolidated for trial wherein judgments were entered for each plaintiff. The cases have likewise by stipulation been consolidated on appeal.

Defendant Prukop filed a cross-complaint against the plaintiff Noles wherein he claimed damages. During the trial plaintiffs deemed it material to establish the particular hospital to which defendant had been taken after the accident. Accordingly witness Monahan, the storekeeper of the Central Emergency Hospital in San Francisco, who had charge of the records of all emergency hospitals in San…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Mar Shee v. Maryland Assurance Corp.California Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Estate of DolbeerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Oppenheimer v. ClunieCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Barlow v. FrinkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Rowe v. SuchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Loper v. MorrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  2. Baltimore American Ins. Co. v. Pecos Mercantile Co.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1941
  3. People v. KingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  4. Wadena v. BushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  5. Estate of NewmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939

3 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