Legal Opinion

Morrow v. Mendleson

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 26, 1936No. Civ. 10056PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNourse, P. J.

Plaintiff brought this action against the two defendants to recover for injuries incurred when the automobiles operated by the defendants collided at the intersection of Jones and Sutter Streets in San Francisco, as a result of which the car operated by Mendleson struck plaintiff as she was walking across the intersection. Judgment was had against both defendants, and Mendleson alone has appealed.

There is very little real conflict in the evidence. What appears to be a conflict rests mainly on the more or less unreliable testimony of eye-witnesses who saw disconnected events leading to the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Smellie v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1931
  2. Couchman v. SnellingCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1931
  3. Page v. MazzeiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  4. Lindenbaum v. BarbourCalifornia Supreme Court · 1931
  5. Norris v. Detroit United RailwayMichigan Supreme Court · 1916

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Christiansen v. HollingsCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  2. Scott v. SheedyCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
  3. Levar v. ElkinsAlaska Supreme Court · 1980
  4. Sullivan v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1950
  5. Garland v. HirshCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946

7 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