Legal Opinion

Billig v. Southern Pacific Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided November 1, 1923No. L. A. No. 7191PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RICHARDS, J., pro tem.

These three actions, commenced separately, were by stipulation of the respective parties tried together and, while separately appealed, have been also, by stipulation, presented for our review upon one transcript and a single set of briefs. Each of said actions was commenced for the recovery of damages from the defendants, who were the same in each case, for injuries arising out of a collision between an interurban gasoline motor-car of the defendant Southern Pacific Company and a motor-truck owned by the defendant Wm. C. Harris, and being operated by the employee of…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Herbert v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  2. Lindsay-Strathmore Irrigation Dist. v. Superior Court of Tulare Cty.California Supreme Court · 1920
  3. Young v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Young v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1920
  5. Billing v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1922

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Peri v. L.A. Junction Ry.California Supreme Court · 1943
  2. Choquette v. Key System Transit Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
  3. Powell v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1950
  4. Young v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1929
  5. Cate v. Fresno Traction Co.California Supreme Court · 1931

29 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