Holman v. Viko
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
161 Cal.App.2d 87 (1958)
FLORINE HOLMAN, Appellant,
v.
PAUL E. VIKO, Respondent.
Civ. No. 22845.
California Court of Appeals. Second Dist., Div. Two.
June 4, 1958.
Zeman, Hertzberg & Schekman for Appellants.
Parker, Stanbury, Reese & McGee and Kenneth R. Garrett for Respondent.
ASHBURN, J.
Appeals from judgments for defendant in two companion personal injury actions. The cases were tried together before a jury and plaintiffs base their appeals upon alleged errors in instructions. Counsel claim error (1) in instructing the jury that violation of section 80.39 of Los Angeles Municipal Code would…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part.
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Pipoly v. BensonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Buckley v. ChadwickCalifornia Supreme Court · 1955
- Brandelius v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
- Girdner v. Union Oil Co.California Supreme Court · 1932
- Daniels v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.