Legal Opinion

Kindred v. Pacific Automobile Insurance

California Supreme Court

Decided January 17, 1938No. L. A. 16377PublishedCited by 19 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWaste, C. J.

The appeal herein was dismissed by the District Court of Appeal of the Second District, Division Two, for failure of appellant’s opening brief to comply with certain requirements of rule VIII. A petition for hearing in this court was granted because of what appeared to be a too technical application of the rule. After the order of transfer was made the rule was amended in such manner as no longer to authorize the dismissal of the appeal for violations thereof.

Appellant’s brief challenges the propriety of the trial court’s action in admitting certain evidence and in directing a verdict for the…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hynding v. Home Accident InsuranceCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
  2. Purefoy v. Pacific Automobile Indemnity ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  3. Sears v. Illinois Indemnity Co.California Court of Appeal · 1932
  4. Purcell v. Pacific Automobile Insurance Co.California Court of Appeal · 1937

3Cited by19 opinions

  1. Pacific Automobile Insurance v. LewisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
  2. Highlands Ins. Co. v. UNIVERSAL UNDERWRITERS INS.California Court of Appeal · 1979
  3. Bruins v. AndersonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1951
  4. Time Insurance v. Fulton-DeKalb Hospital AuthorityCourt of Appeals of Georgia · 1993
  5. Mirich v. Underwriter's at Lloyd's LondonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944

14 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