Brett v. S.H. Frank Company
California Supreme Court
APPEALS from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco and from an order refusing a new trial. Thomas F. Graham, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtShaw, J.
Defendant appeals from the judgment and also from an order denying its motion for a new trial.
Plaintiff’s action is for damages alleged to have been caused by defendant’s negligence. The main defense is that the injury to the plaintiff was due to his own negligence. The cause was before this court upon a former appeal from an order granting a new trial. (See Brett v. Frank & Co., 153 Cal. 267, [94 Pac. 1051].) The order was there affirmed. The present appeals are from the judgment and order resulting from the second trial. It is claimed by defendant’s counsel that the judgment and order here…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Allen v. BryantCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- Brett v. S. H. Frank & Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- Ergo v. Merced Falls Gas & Elec. Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
3Cited by15 opinions
- Estate of BairdCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
- McEwen v. New York Life InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1921
- Kerr Land & Timber Co. v. EmmersonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1965
- Andrews v. Valley Ice Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
- Roseberry v. Edward F. Niehaus & Co.California Supreme Court · 1913
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.