Legal Opinion

Lindstrom v. McReynolds

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 13, 1951No. Civ. No. 7926Published

1Opinion of the CourtAdams, P. J.

Plaintiff Lindstrom brought this action against defendant McBeynolds, alleging that due to negligence on the part of the latter in the operation of an automobile which he was driving, McBeynolds’ car collided with the vehicle driven by plaintiff, with resulting injuries to plaintiff for which he sought damages. McBeynolds, in answer to plaintiff’s complaint, denied negligence on his own part, alleged contributory negligence on plaintiff’s part, and in a cross-complaint sought recovery from plaintiff for damages to defendant’s automobile.

The jury which heard the evidence returned a verdict in…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Formosa v. Yellow Cab Co.California Court of Appeal · 1939
  2. Hamm v. San Joaquin & Kings River Canal Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
  3. Mize v. DuffyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API