Legal Opinion

Laverne v. Dold

California Court of Appeal

Decided October 20, 1936No. Civ. 5607PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPullen, P. J.

In this case the trial court set aside the verdict of the jury and granted the motion of plaintiff, respondent herein, for a new trial upon the ground of insufficiency of the evidence, and newly discovered evidence. Appellant urges such order constituted an abuse of discretion.

The accident with which this litigation is concerned occurred in the afternoon of May 18, 1933, in a business district and at an obstructed intersection of Third and M Streets in Sacramento. Defendant Rose, as the employee of defendant Bold, was driving a truck southerly on Third Street where it intersects M Street, and…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Waer v. WaerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Rosenberg v. Geo. A. Moore & Co.California Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Spear v. United RailroadsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1911
  4. Malloway v. HughesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
  5. Bradbury Estate Co. v. CarrollCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1929

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Bauman v. City and County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  2. Gossman v. GossmanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  3. King v. Union Pac. R. Co.Utah Supreme Court · 1949
  4. Baker v. BerremanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  5. MacKenzie v. AngleCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

5 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