Legal Opinion

Johnson v. Thomas

California Supreme Court

Decided January 31, 1896No. L. A. No. 63PublishedCited by 2 opinions

APPEAL from Superior Court, Los Angeles County; Walter Van Dyke, Judge. Action by Peter Johnson against Albert Thomas for personal injuries due to negligence of defendant’s servant. Prom a judgment for plaintiff and an order denying a new trial defendant appeals.

1Opinion of the Court

SEARLS, C.

This is an action by Peter Johnson to recover damages for personal injuries received by plaintiff by being knocked down and run over by a horse and wagon driven by a servant of defendant, upon a public street in the city of Los Angeles, California. Plaintiff had a verdict and judgment for $500, from which judgment, and from an order denying his motion for a new trial, defendant appeals. Appellant makes three points for reversal: (1) That the court below erred in denying defendant’s motion for a nonsuit. (2) That the court erred in admitting in evidence, on the part of plaintiff,…

Also in this document: Per curiam.

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Holmes v. South Pacific Coast RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  2. Van Praag v. GaleCalifornia Supreme Court · 1895
  3. Jamison v. San Jose & Santa Clara RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1880
  4. Davis v. ButtonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  5. Dufour v. Central Pacific RailroadCalifornia Supreme Court · 1885

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Bellinger v. HughesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1916
  2. Borland v. Key System Transit Co.California Supreme Court · 1928

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

Powered by the Exa API