Legal Opinion

Martin v. Southern Pacific Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided October 22, 1900No. Sac. No. 617PublishedCited by 25 opinions

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County and from an order refusing a new trial. Justin Jacobs, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHarrison, J.

The present action is brought for the recovery of damages sustained by the plaintiff by reason of injuries received by his wife while she was being conveyed as a passenger upon one of the trains of the defendant. It is alleged in the complaint that by reason of the negligence of the defendant the injuries received hy plaintiff’s wife were permanent, and rendered her wholly unahle to perform her usual work and duties, and that hy reason thereof he has been, and will be through the remainder of her life, deprived of her services and compelled to provide medical aid and care for her. Judgment…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Tell v. GibsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1884
  2. Redfield v. Oakland Consolidated Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1896

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. Perkins v. Sunset Tel. and Tel. Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
  2. Acadia, California, Ltd. v. HerbertCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
  3. Meek v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Moody v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
  5. Cerri v. United StatesDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1948

20 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