Keogh v. Maulding
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the CourtDoran, J.
In this action for damages for personal injuries, plaintiff was awarded damages by the jury in the total sum of $1,000. Plaintiff moved for a new trial, but only “as to the measure of damages alone because of the inadequacy of the verdict.” Said motion was granted. The order was as follows: “It is hereby ordered and decreed that a new trial be and is hereby granted to the plaintiff on the single issue of the measure of damages. Said order is granted on the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the amount of the verdict.”
Defendant appeals and the sole issue involved is whether…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Pearl v. PearlCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Bencich v. Market Street Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937
- Donnatin v. Union Hardware & Metal Co.California Court of Appeal · 1918
- Wallace v. MillerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1938
3Cited by31 opinions
- Hamasaki v. FlothoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Leipert v. HonoldCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- McNear v. Pacific Greyhound LinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
- Cary v. WentzelCalifornia Supreme Court · 1952
- Shurman v. Fresno Ice Rink Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1949
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.