Abrams v. Hubert
California Court of Appeal
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
- Leavens v. Pinkham & McKevittCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
- Koeberle v. HotchkissCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1935
- Marshall v. HancockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Ah Gett v. CarrCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1906
- Grandy v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1935
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Beckett v. Kaynar Manufacturing Co.California Supreme Court · 1958
- Duff v. Schaefer Ambulance Service, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1955
- Guyer v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1938
- Newman v. SundeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- West v. LaurenceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.