Legal Opinion
Stoltz v. Converse
California Court of Appeal
Decided September 4, 1946No. Civ. 7263PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtAdams, P. J.
Plaintiff sued defendants Machado, Fernadez Trucking Co., Converse Trucking Service and R. N. B. Converse, for damages for personal injuries suffered by him in an accident which occurred on January 10, 1944, in the underpass or tunnel adjacent to the town of Davis, where after a curve to the right (when traveling toward Sacramento) the highway descends at a 5 per cent grade under the tracks of the Southern Pacific Railroad Company. The action was prosecuted against Converse only, he being an individual doing business as the Converse Trucking Service. Trial by a jury resulted in a verdict in…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Zibbell v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
- Treadwell v. WhittierCalifornia Supreme Court · 1889
- Lombardi v. California Street Railway Co.California Supreme Court · 1899
- Lejeune v. General Petroleum Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1932
- Wilcox v. SwayCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Little v. Amber Hotel Co.California Court of Appeal · 2011
- Tornell v. MunsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Finn v. J. H. Rose Truck LinesCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1965