Legal Opinion

Borland v. Pacific Meat & Packing Co.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided July 8, 1929No. 21782. Department OnePublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtTolman, J.

This action was instituted by respondent, as plaintiff, to recover for personal injuries received as the result of a collision between a truck, owned and operated in the business of appellant, and an automobile, owned by the defendants Thompson; respondent himself occupying the position of an innocent bystander. The cause was tried to a jury, resulting in a verdict in favor of defendants Thompson and against the appellant in the sum of $8,000. A judgment was entered on the verdict and this appeal followed.

Appellant does not question the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict, nor…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Vicksburg & Meridian Railroad v. PutnamSupreme Court of the United States · 1886
  2. McCaffrey v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1926
  3. Bourke v. Butte Electric & Power Co.Montana Supreme Court · 1905
  4. Seeherman v. Wilkes-Barre Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1916
  5. Colusa Parrot Mining & Smelting Co. v. MonahanCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1908

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. McNair v. BergerMontana Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Southgate v. Eastern Transp. Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1927
  3. State v. HinkleyWashington Supreme Court · 1958
  4. Henry Du Bois Sons Co. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1931
  5. State v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1985

2 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