Legal Opinion

Wright v. Yosemite Transportation Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 28, 1915No. Civ. No. 1393PublishedCited by 2 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

The plaintiffs are husband and wife, and this action was by them instituted for the recovery of damages, alleged to have been sustained by the plaintiff, Corinne K. Wright, from personal injuries which are charged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant.

The jury, by whom the action was tried, found for the defendant, and thereupon the plaintiff moved for a new trial on the usual statutory grounds, among them that the verdict was not justified by the evidence, and the motion was allowed.

TMs appeal is by the defendant from the order granting said motion.

The general facts are well…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Bjorman v. Fort Bragg Redwood Co.California Supreme Court · 1891
  2. Bledsoe v. DecrowCalifornia Supreme Court · 1901
  3. Eidinger v. SigwartCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1910
  4. Baldwin v. Napa & Sonoma Wine Co.California Court of Appeal · 1905
  5. Ball v. American Transfer Co.California Court of Appeal · 1913

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Butler v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1924
  2. Wright v. Yosemite Transportation Co.California Court of Appeal · 1918

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API