Legal Opinion

Falk v. Rose

Washington Supreme Court

Decided June 29, 1943No. 29010PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMillard, J.

Alleging the proximate cause of the accident was the negligence of defendants, J. Victor Falk, operator of an automobile, and his three guests brought four separate actions to recover against defendants for property damage and personal injuries, alleged to have been sustained as the result of a collision September 20, 1941, in Pierce county, of Falk’s automobile with a sedan operated by Oscar Rose and with a roadster operated by Aubrey Ramm. Trial of the causes, which were consolidated, resulted in verdict ■for defendants.

Plaintiffs moved for a new trial on six of the eight statutory grounds:…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Tremblay v. NicholsWashington Supreme Court · 1936

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. PEDERSON'S FRYER FARMS v. TransamericaCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
  2. Pederson's Fryer Farms, Inc. v. Transamerica InsuranceCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1996
  3. Hamilton v. Kiona-Benton Irrigation DistrictWashington Supreme Court · 1954
  4. Nash v. NashWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Hopper v. GallantWashington Supreme Court · 1955

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