Legal Opinion

Schultz v. Sussman

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 22, 1935No. Civ. 9444PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THE COURT.

This appeal is from a judgment entered on a verdict in favor of plaintiff in an action for damages for an alleged malicious assault by defendant upon plaintiff. The .verdict and judgment was for the sum of $11,000. Defendant moved for a new trial, which was denied on condition that plaintiff deduct from the verdict $6,000. Plaintiff filed his consent to such reduction.

Appellant contends that the court erred in denying his motion for a new trial, and also that the court erred in refusing to permit defendant to cross-examine plaintiff regarding other damage suits plaintiff might have…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Green v. SouleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1904
  2. Scott v. Times-Mirror Co.California Supreme Court · 1919
  3. East Bay Municipal Utility District v. KiefferCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929
  4. Merralls v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Murphy v. ZwiegCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Maffeo v. HolmesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  2. Rather v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Davis v. FransonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  4. Dunford v. General Water Heater Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Abney v. CoalwellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1962

4 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