Legal Opinion
Malkasian v. Irwin
California Supreme Court
Decided August 27, 1964No. S. F. No. 21675PublishedCited by 76 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, J.
Plaintiff brought this action for the wrongful death of her son. The jury brought in a defense verdict. Plaintiff moved for a new trial. The motion was granted. Defendant appeals, contending that the order granting the new trial cannot be sustained on any of the grounds contained in the motion.
Before directly discussing the new trial proceedings, some reference should be made to the evidence.
The undisputed evidence shows that plaintiff’s son was killed in an accident which occurred on Highway 99, some 9 miles north of Fresno. At that point the road consisted of three lanes (southbound,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Aced v. Hobbs-Sesack Plumbing Co.California Supreme Court · 1961
- Shaw v. Pacific Greyhound LinesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1958
- Whitley v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1941
- Cox v. Tyrone Power Enterprises Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1942
- Hoel v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1955
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by76 opinions
- Mercer v. PerezCalifornia Supreme Court · 1968
- Cassim v. Allstate InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
- Las Palmas Associates v. Las Palmas Center AssociatesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1991
- Jiminez v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.California Supreme Court · 1971
- People v. AultCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.