Legal Opinion

Fields v. Napa Milling Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 21, 1958No. Civ. 18086PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MARTINELLI, J. pro tem. *

Plaintiff Opal Fields and her minor daughters, Brenda and Karen, through James Fields, their guardian ad litem, sought damages for personal injuries arising from a collision involving a truck owned by defendant Napa Milling Company and driven by its employee, defendant August Rossi. James Fields, in his individual capacity as husband and father, sought to recover medical expenses incurred as a result of the accident. Napa Milling and Warehouse Company filed a cross-complaint seeking to recover for damage to its truck.

A trial without a jury resulted in a judgment…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  2. Joerger v. Pacific Gas & Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1929
  3. Stickel v. San Diego Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Schrader v. NevilleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
  5. Realty Construction & Mortgage Co. v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1913

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Oakes v. McCarthy Co.California Court of Appeal · 1968
  2. Frustuck v. City of FairfaxCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  3. Kizer v. County of San MateoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1991
  4. Rappenecker v. Sea-Land Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1979
  5. Anthony v. Kelsey-Hayes Co.California Court of Appeal · 1972

18 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