Legal Opinion

Loos v. Boston Shoe Co.

California Court of Appeal

Decided February 26, 1954No. Civ. 19852PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtShinn, P. J.

Plaintiff was struck by a car owned and operated by defendant Carey, an employee of Boston Shoe Company. Jack Smith also was sued as an owner of the car but there is no discussion in the briefs as to his connection with the accident. Plaintiff’s evidence was presented to a jury. When plaintiff had rested, the motion of Boston Shoe Company and Smith for a nonsuit was granted, and judgment was ordered in their favor for costs. Plaintiff and Carey stipulated to dismissal of the jury and to a trial to the court. It was also stipulated that if the office manager of Boston Shoe Company were called…

2Cases cited26 opinions

  1. Westberg v. WilldeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. Loper v. MorrisonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Kish v. California State Automobile Ass'nCalifornia Supreme Court · 1922
  4. Ryan v. FarrellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1929
  5. May v. FarrellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Boynton v. McKalesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  2. Fruit v. SchreinerAlaska Supreme Court · 1972
  3. Theodore J. Chapin and Adam Sydlik v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1958
  4. Vind v. Asamblea Apostolica De La Fe en Christo JesusCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1957
  5. Moradi v. Marsh USA, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2013

3 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