Legal Opinion
Gosling v. Nichols
California Court of Appeal
Decided June 28, 1943No. Civ. 14106PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMcCOMB, J.
From a judgment of dismissal predicated upon the ground that the present action abated on the death' of defendant’s intestate, plaintiffs appeal. The action was instituted to recover damages for the wrongful death of Joseph Gosling.
These are the essential facts:
On December 10, 1941, plaintiffs, as the sole heirs at law of Joseph Gosling, deceased, Sled an action against A. La Verne Nichols, pursuant to the provisions of section 377 of the Code of Civil Procedure, to recover damages for the wrongful death of Mr. Gosling.
The complaint contained two causes of action: (1) for negligence, and (2)…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Clark v. GoodwinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
- Bernstein v. Queens County Jockey ClubAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1927
- Sayles v. PetersCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Singley v. BigelowCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- National Automoble Insurance Co. v. CunninghamCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Ritchie v. Anchor Casualty Co.California Court of Appeal · 1955
- Rubino v. Utah Canning Co.California Court of Appeal · 1954
- Dagley v. Armstrong Rubber Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1965
- Hinton v. Republic Aviation CorporationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1959
- Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. Jackson Transportation Co.Court of Appeals of Georgia · 1972
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.