Legal Opinion

Vietti v. Hines

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 21, 1920No. Civ. No. 2051PublishedCited by 4 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtHart, J.

This is an appeal by the defendant from a judgment in an action for personal injuries, the cause having been tried by the court without a jury.

On April 16, 1918, plaintiff, a woodcutter, employed by Lamoine Lumber Company, at Lamoine, was visiting in Redding. He went to Redding, he testified, to take a “couple of days’ lay-off.” At about 5 o’clock that evening he received a telegram recalling him to Lamoine. The telegram read: “Lamoine, California, 9:08 A. M. April 16th, 1918. A. Vietti, care of B. Vietti, Redding, California. Come up at once. We found several mistakes in the bill. Cannot…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Zibbell v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Herbert v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  3. H.M. Filer v. . New York Central R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1872
  4. Seller v. Market-Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1903
  5. Johnson v. Southern Pacific R.R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1908

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McBride v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Ingham v. Luxor Cab Co.California Court of Appeal · 2001
  3. Lund v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Lund v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1944

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

Powered by the Exa API