Legal Opinion

Zarzana v. Neve Drug Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided February 26, 1919No. Sac. No. 2717PublishedCited by 40 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

1Opinion of the CourtLennon, J.

In this action, plaintiff sued in his own right for the sum of five thousand dollars and recovered judgment in the sum of $350, with costs of suit, as damages for personal injuries, the result of being struck by a motorcycle ridden and driven by the defendant-Albert Holthaus, who at the time was in the employ of the defendant Neve Drug Company. Issue was joined as to the negligence of the defendants, and as a special defense, the answer of both defendants pleaded that “the injuries occurring to . . . plaintiff were proximately caused by the negligence of the parents of . . . plaintiff in…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Robinson v. ConeSupreme Court of Vermont · 1850
  2. O'Dowd v. NewnhamCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1913
  3. Wymore v. Mahaska CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 1889
  4. Fox v. Oakland Consolidated Street RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
  5. Neff v. City of CameronSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Reaugh v. Cudahy Packing Co.California Supreme Court · 1922
  2. Crane v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
  3. Hatzakorzian v. Rucker-Fuller Desk Co.California Supreme Court · 1925
  4. Haft v. Lone Palm HotelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1970
  5. Akins v. County of SonomaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

35 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