Legal Opinion
Behseleck v. Andrus
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided September 10, 1932No. File No. 7317PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtRudolph, J.
The plaintiff brought this action against the defendants, charging that the concurring negligence of the defendants Wilbur Andrus and E. Bross was the proximate cause of certain injuries she sustained. Wilhelmina Andrus is made a party defendant, due to the fact that she was the owner of the car driven by Wilbur Andrus. The defendant Hattie Bross was the owner of the car driven by E. Bross.
•On the evening of June 15, 1930, the plaintiff, together with the defendant Wilbur Andrus and another young couple, was driving west from Aberdeen on the Yellowstone Trail in a car owned by Wilhelmina…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Crumpton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Chambers v. HawkinsCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1930
- Jimmie Guest Motor Co. v. OlcottCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1930
- Norton v. HallSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921
- Whaley v. VidalSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1911
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Miller v. StevensSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1934
- Peters v. HoisingtonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1949
- Olesen v. SnyderSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
- Flanagan v. SlatterySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1951
- Veith v. O'BRIENSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2007
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.