Legal Opinion
Loope v. Greyhound Lines, Inc.
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 8, 1952No. Civ. 4466PublishedCited by 21 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMussell, J.
Plaintiffs allegedly sustained injuries and property damage on February 2, 1947, which they claimed were caused by the negligence of the defendant Greyhound Lines, Inc. and its driver, Oscar LeRoy Perkins.
Defendants’ demurrer to the complaint, setting up the statute of limitations (Code Civ. Proc., § 340, subd. 3) as a bar to the complaint, was sustained with leave to amend. An amended complaint containing five causes of action was filed and in each cause of action it was alleged, among other matters, “that between the dates of February 2, 1947, and February 1, 1948, said defendants were…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Moropoulos v. C. H. & O. B. Fuller Co.California Supreme Court · 1921
- Swan v. TalbotCalifornia Supreme Court · 1907
- Hall v. BellWisconsin Supreme Court · 1910
- Farvour v. GeltisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1949
- Taylor v. Navigazione Libera TriestinaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1938
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Steiner v. 20th Century-Fox Film Corp.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1956
- Dew v. AppleberryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1979
- Epstein v. FrankCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1981
- George Dedmon v. Falls Products IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- Berry v. BerryCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1953
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.