Legal Opinion

Akers v. Cowan

California Court of Appeal

Decided June 2, 1938No. Civ. 1882PublishedCited by 27 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBarnard, P. J.

This is an action for damages on account of injuries sustained by the plaintiffs in an automobile collision which occurred at the intersection of two streets in an outlying section of the city of Fresno. Through a cross-complaint the defendant also sought to recover damages. A jury brought in a verdict for $3,000 in favor of the plaintiff husband, but. awarded nothing to the plaintiff wife. From the ensuing judgment this appeal was taken.

The appellant first contends that certain physical facts which appear in the evidence are sufficient to demonstrate that the testimony in favor of the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Pierce v. United Gas and Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  2. Starr v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1921
  3. Rathbun v. WhiteCalifornia Supreme Court · 1910
  4. Maggini v. West Coast Life InsuranceCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1934
  5. Anderson v. MothersheadCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1937

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by27 opinions

  1. Westberg v. WilldeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1939
  2. City of La Mesa v. Tweed & Gambrell Planing MillCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1956
  3. Spear v. LeuenbergerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
  4. Burch v. Valley Motor Lines, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1947
  5. Bramble v. McEwanCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940

22 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