Legal Opinion

Hackelberry v. Sherlock Land & Cattle Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 17, 1919No. Civ. No. 1752PublishedCited by 5 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the Court

BUCK, P. J., pro tem.

Plaintiff while engaged in farming work in the employ of the defendant corporation in October, of 1916, was injured by being trampled upon by a horse, claimed to be vicious, which plaintiff was in the act of unhitching from a harrow team furnished him in his work by the defendant. Upon the trial a verdict and judgment thereon in the sum of six hundred dollars was rendered against the defendant, who appeals therefrom upon the grounds that the court erred in denying defendant’s motion for nonsuit, and also erred in giving and refusing to give certain instructions.

In his…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Crabbe v. Mammoth Channel Gold Mining Co.California Supreme Court · 1914
  2. Perry v. Angelus Hospital AssociationCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  3. Davis v. ForbesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1898
  4. Hughes v. Warman Steel Casting Co.California Supreme Court · 1917
  5. Denver & Rio Grande R. R. v. IlesSupreme Court of Colorado · 1898

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Robinet v. HawksCalifornia Supreme Court · 1927
  2. O'Brien v. Gateway StablesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1951
  3. Burns v. Southern Pacific Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
  4. Anderson v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Elder v. RoseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1923

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API