Legal Opinion

Deorosan v. Haslett Warehouse Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 28, 1958No. Civ. 9435PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSchottky, J.

Plaintiff above named commenced an action against defendants Haslett Warehouse Company, Beagle Products Company, West Sacramento Storage Company and Melvin Bunch to recover damages for injuries sustained through the alleged negligence of Bunch, who, it was alleged, was an employee of the aforesaid defendants. The default of Bunch for failure to answer was entered, and after the plaintiff’s case had been presented, the trial court granted the motion of each of the other defendants for a nonsuit. Judgment of nonsuit was entered in favor of each of said defendants, and plaintiff has appealed…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Estate of LancesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Snyder v. Southern California Edison Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Atherley v. MacDonald, Young & Nelson, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1956
  4. Billing v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
  5. Umsted v. Scofield Engineering Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1928

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

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Searle Bros. v. SearleUtah Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Johnson v. A. Schilling & Co.California Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Smith v. ACandS, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1994
  4. Miller v. Long Beach Oil Development Co.California Court of Appeal · 1959
  5. Strait v. Hale Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1972

7 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