Legal Opinion

Lavenstein v. Maile

Court of Appeals of Virginia

Decided April 29, 1926PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtChinn, J.

Clifford B. Maile brought an action, by notice of motion, against Harry H. Lavenstein and George Stutz, to recover for damage to said Maile’s automobile, resulting from a collision alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendants. In the court below there was a judgment in favor of the defendant Stutz, *793and a verdict and judgment against Lavenstein, who has brought the case here upon a writ of error.

It appears that Lavenstein and Maile were driving their respective automobiles from Hopewell to Peters-burg on the highway connecting those cities, Maile’s ear following that driven…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Starcher v. South Penn Oil Co.West Virginia Supreme Court · 1918
  2. Carlton v. BoudarSupreme Court of Virginia · 1916
  3. Southall v. SmithSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1922
  4. Walton, Witten & Graham v. Miller's AdministratrixSupreme Court of Virginia · 1909
  5. Arminius Chemical Co. v. LandrumSupreme Court of Virginia · 1912

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Maroulis v. ElliottSupreme Court of Virginia · 1966
  2. Robertson v. HobsonWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Barnes v. LiebigSupreme Court of Florida · 1941
  4. Gough v. ShanerSupreme Court of Virginia · 1955
  5. Chandler v. DuganWyoming Supreme Court · 1952

32 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