Legal Opinion

Nichols v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided August 2, 1918No. L. A. No. 4551. Department TwoPublishedCited by 24 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. Barstow, Beach & Rohe, Frank Karr, and R. C. Gortner, for Appellants.

1Opinion of the CourtWilbur, J.

Defendants appeal from a judgment rendered in favor of the plaintiff for damages received by her in a collision between an electric railway car operated by the defendant Railway Company and an automobile operated by the defendant Negley,’ in which plaintiff was riding as a guest. Defendant Railway Company relies upon the defense of contributory negligence, it being claimed that the plaintiff was negligent in riding in the automobile of defendant Negley while it was being driven at a dangerous speed, without herself taking any precautions to ascertain whether or not the car of the defendant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Tousley v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
  2. Fitzjarrell v. BoydCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1914
  3. Irwin v. Golden State Auto Tour Corp.California Supreme Court · 1918

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. Smellie v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Krause v. RarityCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930
  3. Marchetti v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1928
  4. Malone v. ClemowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Morris v. Standard Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1922

19 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