Legal Opinion

Abrams v. Hubert

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 26, 1935No. Civ. 10564PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

McCOMB, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal by plaintiffs from a judgment in favor of defendants after a trial before a jury of an action brought to recover damages resulting from an automobile accident.

Viewing the evidence most favorable to defendants (Ah Gett v. Carr, 3 Cal. App. 47, 48 [84 Pac. 458]), the facts in the instant case are:

Plaintiffs were riding in their automobile in an easterly direction on a rain covered and slippery boulevard, when defendants approached from the opposite direction on the same street at a speed of not more than twenty-five miles per hour. Defendants’ car commenced…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Leavens v. Pinkham & McKevittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  2. Koeberle v. HotchkissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
  3. Marshall v. HancockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
  4. Ah Gett v. CarrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
  5. Grandy v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Beckett v. Kaynar Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1958
  2. Duff v. Schaefer Ambulance Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1955
  3. Guyer v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1938
  4. Newman v. SundeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  5. West v. LaurenceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

1 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