Legal Opinion

Smith v. Mitchell

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 21, 1923No. Civ. No. 2595PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFinch, P. J.

Plaintiff sued to recover damages for the alienation of his wife’s affections by defendant. The jury returned a verdict in favor of defendant and judgment was entered accordingly. Plaintiff moved for a new trial upon the following grounds, among others: “ 1. Irregularity of the proceedings of the court, jury and adverse party, to wit, the defendant, by which the plaintiff was prevented from having a fair trial. ... 7. Error in law occurring at the trial and excepted to by the party making the application.” The court granted the motion “upon the ground of errors in the instructions given to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Boland v. StanleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
  2. Cripe v. CripeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1915
  3. Oakman v. BeldenSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1900
  4. Steil v. Sun Insurance OfficeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
  5. Modisett v. McPikeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Gray v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  2. Hunter v. ThomasCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1949
  3. Ellis v. JewettCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937
  4. Sun-Maid Raisin Growers v. Paul A. Mosesian & Son, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1928
  5. People Ex Rel. Department of Public Works v. HuntCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1969

1 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