Legal Opinion

Lundell v. Hackbarth

California Court of Appeal

Decided April 22, 1964No. Civ. 10682PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPierce, P. J.

Plaintiff was a rider in an automobile owned and driven by defendant Acker. Mr. Acker was involved in a collision when his car struck the rear end of a vehicle being driven by defendant Hackbarth. When the accident happened, the latter was either making, or preparing to make, a left turn at an intersection. Plaintiff was injured and sued both Mr. Acker and Mr. Hackbarth to recover damages. The jury returned a general verdict for both defendants.

The evidence clearly showed Mr. Acker’s negligence but he was concededly not guilty of wilful misconduct and was not intoxicated. On appeal plaintiff…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Malloy v. FongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
  2. Martinez v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Whitechat v. GuyetteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
  4. Reynolds v. FraysherCalifornia Supreme Court · 1956
  5. Whitmore v. FrenchCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Neuser v. BrittoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  2. Boykin v. BoykinCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968
  3. Devins v. HongCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  4. Neuser v. BrittoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
  5. Worford v. JiminezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1968

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

Powered by the Exa API