Legal Opinion
Purcell v. Goldberg
California Court of Appeal
Decided August 25, 1939No. Civ. 10781PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKnight, J.
Plaintiff brought this action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained when her automobile was struck and overturned by one owned by the defendant Goldberg and driven with his consent by the defendant Caler. The action was tried before a jury, and a verdict rendered in plaintiff’s favor and against both defendants for $2,840.50. Judgment was entered accordingly, from which defendants appeal.
The accident happened about 9 o’clock at night on a wide curve on Market Street extension in the vicinity of Twin Peaks in San Francisco. The highway in that locality is built on a grade, and…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Douglas v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1928
- Formosa v. Yellow Cab Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
- Reichle v. HazieCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
- Miner v. Dabney-Johnson Oil Corp.California Supreme Court · 1933
- Craig v. BoyesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1932
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Helfend v. Southern California Rapid Transit DistrictCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
- Dillard v. McKnightCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Fifield Manor v. FinstonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1960
- Louie v. Hagstrom's Food Stores, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1947
- Standard Oil Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1946
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.