Legal Opinion

Richardson v. Ribosso

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 10, 1932No. Docket No. 7944PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.

Plaintiffs sued for personal injuries to Herman Work, a minor. The cause was tried with a jury and defendant had a verdict. Plaintiffs appeal upon a bill of exceptions.

The single question presented on the appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to justify the verdict. It is the contention of appellants that the evidence discloses negligence on the part of defendant, a want of contributory negligence on the part of the minor, and that the defendant had the last clear chance to avoid the injury. As the jury found adversely to appellants it is sufficient to make but a short statement of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Young v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Dullanty v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1928
  3. French v. Grand Trunk Railway Co.Supreme Court of Vermont · 1904
  4. Moeller v. PackardCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1927
  5. Graham v. Consolidated Motor Transport Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Raggio v. MalloryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Folger v. Richfield Oil Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  3. Johnson v. Southwestern Engineering Co.California Court of Appeal · 1940
  4. Brown v. McCuanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
  5. Garibaldi v. Borchers Bros.California Supreme Court · 1957

3 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