Legal Opinion
Daniel v. Asbill
California Court of Appeal
Decided March 22, 1929No. Docket No. 3702PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MONCUR, J., pro tem.
Plaintiffs are husband and wife and brought this action to recover damages from defendant for injuries to plaintiff’s, F. 0. Daniel, automobile and damages for physical injuries to plaintiff Mrs. Bertha Mae Daniel, as the result of a collision between the said automobile and the automobile of defendant. The case was tried before a jury and resulted in a verdict awarding plaintiff F. 0. Daniel the sum of $185 as damages to his automobile, and Mrs. Daniel was awarded the sum of $7,804.60 as damages resulting from the injuries suffered by her. From the judgment entered upon…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Arnold v. California Portland Cement Co.California Court of Appeal · 1919
- Roche v. Llewellyn Iron Works Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
- McPhee v. LavinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1920
- Howard v. WorthingtonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1920
- Eldridge v. Clark & Henery Construction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1925
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Ostertag v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1944
- Blanton v. CurryCalifornia Supreme Court · 1942
- Balle v. SmithUtah Supreme Court · 1932
- Estate of HamptonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Gladstone v. FortierCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.