Legal Opinion

Lafrenz v. Stoddard

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 17, 1942No. Civ. 11811PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

DOOLING, J. pro tem.

Plaintiffs Henry Lafrenz and Bita Lafrenz, his wife, after a jury trial recovered judgment for personal injuries of $7,500 and $21,600 respectively. We cannpt agree with appellant that the question of his negligence was a close one on the evidence or that the verdicts appeared to be excessive.

Eespondents were crossing Harrison Street between Seventh and Eighth Streets in San Francisco in a legally established crosswalk at the intersection of Langton Street with Harrison. Before stepping off the curb they looked to their left toward Seventh Street, saw no vehicles…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Mudrick v. Market Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Prentis v. BatesMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  3. McPhee v. LavinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
  4. Brown v. YocumCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  5. Elmore v. County of LassenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gray v. BrinkerhoffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Turner v. MannonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  3. Figlia v. WisnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  4. Hawke v. BurnsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  5. Figlia v. WisnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957

1 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