Legal Opinion

Fugelsang v. Steiner

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 24, 1931No. Docket No. 368PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.

The present action was instituted to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in a collision between an automobile operated by plaintiff Martin Fugelsang and another automobile operated by defendant H. J. Steiner. Plaintiffs were minors and have prosecuted the action through their guardian ad litem. At the conclusion of the trial the ease was submitted to the jury under appropriate instructions by the court. The jury returned a verdict in favor of each plaintiff. Thereupon judgment was rendered in favor of plaintiffs. From this judgment defendants have appealed.

The record herein…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Reaugh v. Cudahy Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Gett v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1923
  3. Basler v. Sacramento Gas & Elec. Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Flores v. FitzgeraldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Curran v. Earle C. Anthony, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1926

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hill v. County of FresnoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  2. Gadbury v. RayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1959
  3. Gault v. FreitasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API