Legal Opinion

Chrissinger v. Southern Pacific Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided March 16, 1915No. Sac. No. 2171PublishedCited by 32 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the 'court.

1Opinion of the CourtMelvin, J.

Plaintiff was injured by a north bound limited train of the defendant corporation while he was crossing the main track of that company’s railroad at Willows. Defendant Riley was the engineer of the train which struck plaintiff. In his action for damages after all of the testimony in plaintiff’s behalf had been heard the court sustained a motion for nonsuit and judgment was given accordingly. From the said judgment and from an order denying his motion for a new trial plaintiff appeals.

There was a conflict of evidence upon the subject of warning blasts of the whistle, but for the purposes of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Zibbell v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Herbert v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1898
  3. Green v. Los Angeles Terminal Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1904
  4. Holmes v. South Pacific Coast RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Hamlin v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1907

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

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1935
  2. White v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
  3. Mann v. ScottCalifornia Supreme Court · 1919
  4. Toschi v. ChristianCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  5. Starck v. Pacific Electric Ry. Co.California Supreme Court · 1916

27 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