Legal Opinion

Bingham v. Greenamyer

California Court of Appeal

Decided March 23, 1938No. Civ. 5956PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtPlummer, J.

The plaintiff had judgment against the defendant, awarding him damages for and on account of an injury sustained in an automobile collision on or about the 4th day of'February, 1936. From this judgment the defendant appeals.

The facts as found by the court are to the effect that on the 4th day of February, 1936, at about the hour of 7 A. M., at a point on the California State Highway No. 140, in the county of Merced, the defendant, Charles E. Greenamyer, Jr., was proceeding in a Ford car in a westerly direction at a speed of 30 to 40 miles per hour—(the testimony of the defendant was to the…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Flynn v. KumamotoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  2. Cannon v. KemperCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Bardin v. CaseCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  2. Bristow v. BrinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1963
  3. Ramos v. LinggiCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1954
  4. Huyck v. MerrittCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API