Legal Opinion

Boyd v. Cole

Washington Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 1937No. 26425. Department TwoPublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHolcomb, J.

This action grew out of an automobile accident in which respondent was seriously injured and was allowed seven thousand dollars by a jury after a trial in the lower court. After the verdict had been entered, appellant moved for judgment non obstante veredicto and for a new trial, the latter motion being based upon seven statutory grounds, omitting the fourth one, that of newly discovered evidence. Both motions were denied, from which this appeal arises.

Fourteen errors are assigned by appellant, but few of which can be considered on this appeal. A motion in respondent’s brief to strike the…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Hart v. HoganWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  2. Drainage District No. 2 v. City of EverettWashington Supreme Court · 1933
  3. Davis v. North Coast Transportation Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Gabrielsen v. City of SeattleWashington Supreme Court · 1928
  5. Gaskill v. AmadonWashington Supreme Court · 1934

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

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Beck v. DyeWashington Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Corbaley v. Pierce CountyWashington Supreme Court · 1937
  3. Omeitt v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1944
  4. Peterson v. Department of Labor & IndustriesWashington Supreme Court · 1945
  5. Caylor v. B. C. Motor Transportation, Ltd.Washington Supreme Court · 1937

14 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