Legal Opinion

Connard v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided October 5, 1939No. L. A. No. 17257PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShenk, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries received by the plaintiff while preparing to alight from a street car. Judgment was entered for the defendants on a directed verdict. Plaintiff has appealed. He contends that the trial court erred in taking the case from the jury.

The basis for the directed verdict was the court’s conclusion that plaintiff had violated ordinance No. 77,000 of the city of Los Angeles; that such violation was negligence per se; that it contributed directly to the injury; and that it therefore constituted contributory negligence as a matter of law.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Estate of LancesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Buel v. . New York Central R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1865
  3. Standard Life & Accident Ins. v. ThorntonCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1900
  4. Froeming v. Stockton Electric R. R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1915
  5. Gish v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1939

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Combs v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1947
  2. Dennis v. GonzalesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  3. Combs v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1947
  4. Dennis v. GonzalesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
  5. Dennis v. GonzalesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949

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

Powered by the Exa API