Easton v. United Trade Sch. Contracting Co.
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. J. E. Coberly, B. A. Finch, and Scarborough & Bowen, for Appellant.
1Opinion of the CourtHenshaw, J.
The action is for damages growing out of injuries sustained by plaintiff C. M. Easton’s wife. Trial was had before the court without a jury, and resulted in an award and judgment for plaintiffs. The "items composing this judgment were five thousand dollars for her bodily injuries, $50 for her disability and loss of society, comfort, and service to her husband, $75 for nursing during her illness, $25 for physician’s services, and $10 for medicines. Each of these minor items was made an element of special damage in the complaint.
The charge was that while Mary E. Easton, plaintiff, was driving a…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Mitchell v. . Rochester Railway Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1896
- Sloane v. Southern California Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1896
- Braun v. CravenIllinois Supreme Court · 1898
- Huston v. Freemansburg BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1905
- Warren v. Boston & Maine RailroadMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1895
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Dillon v. LeggCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- State Rubbish Collectors Ass'n v. SiliznoffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Amaya v. Home Ice, Fuel & Supply Co.California Supreme Court · 1963
- Di Mare v. CresciCalifornia Supreme Court · 1962
- Lindley v. KnowltonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.