Legal Opinion

Ormston v. Lane

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 29, 1928No. Docket No. 4869PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HAZLETT, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff Fanny Ferrari Ormston was given judgment by the trial court against defendant T. W. Lane for $3,200 on account of personal injuries she .suffered when struck by an automobile operated by him while she was walking from a sidewalk to board a street-car, but she was denied relief against the other defendants. Plaintiff made a motion for a new trial, which was denied, and her notice of appeal herein recites that she appeals from the order denying the motion and “from the judgment ... in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant T. W. Lane, Jr., for the .sum…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Buelke v. LevenstadtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
  2. Bosse v. MaryeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
  3. Rocca v. SteinmetzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923
  4. Spence v. FisherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Hudson v. Von HammCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Shannon v. FleishhackerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  2. Sleeper v. WoodmanseeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
  3. Stewart v. NorsigianCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API