Legal Opinion

Kirkpatrick v. Damianakes

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 15, 1936No. Civ. 10091PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

This is an appeal by defendants from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in an action brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident.

It was alleged in the complaint that plaintiff was operating a sedan in a “private street or alley” when the defendant truck driver “so negligently and carelessly operated” a Dodge truck that it collided with the sedan and injured plaintiff. The answer denied any negligence or carelessness on the part of defendants and charged plaintiff with contributory negligence. There was practically no conflict in the evidence produced…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Dudley v. Northampton Street Railway Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1909
  2. Davoust v. City of AlamedaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1906
  3. Giannini v. CampodonicoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Gordon v. RobertsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1912
  5. Lindholm v. Northwestern Pacific RailroadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Palmquist v. MercerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1954
  2. FMC Corp. v. Plaisted & CompaniesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1998
  3. Demmer v. City of EurekaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
  4. Yoshiko Yamauchi v. O'NeillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  5. Klein v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2008

10 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