Theren v. Hodorowicz
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.
This is an action for damages aris-' ing out of a collision between an automobile occupied by the plaintiffs and another driven by the defendant. After a verdict in favor of the defendant the plaintiffs made a motion for a new trial, which was granted. From the order granting that motion the defendant has appealed.
The collision occurred on August 2, 1935, at the intersection of Fairmount and Wightman Streets in San Diego. It was stipulated that this is a fifteenrmile per hour intersection within the meaning of the obstructed corner provision of the Vehicle Act. The respondents’ car was…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Arnold v. San Francisco-Oakland Terminal RailwaysCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
- Bagwill v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1928
- New York Lubricating Oil Co. v. United Railroads of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1923
- Page v. MazzeiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
- Leblanc v. CoverdaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Grover v. Sharp & Fellows Contracting Co.California Court of Appeal · 1944
- Fresno City Lines, Inc. v. HermanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950