Legal Opinion

Siesseger v. Puth

Supreme Court of Iowa

Decided October 27, 1931No. 40871PublishedCited by 97 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrimm, J.

The appellant bases his claim for reversal upon error alleged to have been committed by the court in overruling his motion for a directed verdict, and also for alleged error in certain instructions given by the court to the jury.

The plaintiff, a boy seven years of age, is the nephew of the defendant. There is no question, under the record, that at the time of the accident, the boy was a passenger as a guest, by invitation and not for hire, in the automobile owned and driven by the defendant. The accident occurred August 5, 1928. The defendant purchased the car on May 20th of the same year and…

2Cases cited65 opinions

  1. Silver v. SilverSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  2. Altman v. AronsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1919
  3. Naudzius v. LahrMichigan Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Massaletti v. FitzroyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1917
  5. Silver v. SilverSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928

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

3Cited by97 opinions

  1. Ludwig v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1932
  2. Thompson v. BohlkenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1981
  3. Mescher v. BroganSupreme Court of Iowa · 1937
  4. Napier v. MooneyhamCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1936
  5. Fulghum v. BleakleySupreme Court of South Carolina · 1935

92 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