Muller v. Hale
California Supreme Court
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.
1Opinion of the CourtVan Dyke, J.
This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff through the alleged negligence of the defendants. The trial court granted a motion for a nonsuit made by the defendant San Francisco District Telegraph Company after the plaintiff’s case in chief was closed. Plaintiff recovered a verdict and judgment of five thousand dollars against the defendant Anais Hale, who now appeals from the judgment, and also from an order denying a motion for a new trial.
1. Appellant claims the court erred in refusing to allow the defendant Hale four peremptory challenges.…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Doeg v. CookCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- Pastene v. AdamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1874
- Clark v. BennettCalifornia Supreme Court · 1899
- People v. KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1865
- Cook v. Los Angeles & Pasadena Electric Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1901
3Cited by20 opinions
- Crane v. SmithCalifornia Supreme Court · 1943
- Merrill v. Los Angeles Gas Elec. Co.California Supreme Court · 1910
- State v. PersingerWashington Supreme Court · 1963
- Lebak v. NelsonIdaho Supreme Court · 1940
- Springer v. Pacific Fruit ExchangeCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1928
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.