Legal Opinion

Gomez v. Lindberg

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 17, 1936No. Civ. 1578PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMarks, J.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered after the granting of a motion for nonsuit. The motion was granted upon the ground that the evidence showed plaintiff guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.

The general rule governing the granting of motions for non-suit is clearly stated in 9 California Jurisprudence, page 551, as follows.■ “It is, therefore, well settled that upon a motion for nonsuit, particularly Avhcn made at the close of plaintiff’s case, all the evidence must be construed most strongly against the defendant. Every favorable inference, fairly deducible, and every…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Smith v. Occidental & Oriental Steamship Co.California Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Dewhirst v. LeopoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Thomas v. German Gen. Benevolent Soc'yCalifornia Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Skaggs v. WileyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  5. Williams v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1916

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. National Automoble Insurance Co. v. CunninghamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  2. Hickenbottom v. JeppesenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. Dieckmann v. SignoriniCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  4. Long v. BeversCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936

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

Powered by the Exa API