Legal Opinion
Sinclair v. Harp
California Court of Appeal
Decided December 16, 1936No. Civ. 5594PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPlummer, J.
Judgment was rendered for the plaintiff in this action for the amount of damages alleged to have been caused to a “.Kleiber” truck owned and operated by the plaintiff, by reason of a collision between said truck and a “Fageol” truck owned and operated by the defendants. From this judgment the defendants appeal.
The appeal is also from an order denying the defendants’ motion for a new trial, but as no appeal lies from such an order, that portion of the appellants’ action may be disregarded.
The questions presented for consideration upon this appeal are as follows: 1st. Is the finding of the…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- White v. DavisCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1930
- Chaney v. MooreWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1926
- Dwelly v. McReynoldsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1936
- Salomon v. MeyerCalifornia Supreme Court · 1934
- State Compensation Insurance Fund v. ScamellCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1925
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Wohlenberg v. MalcewiczCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1943
- Reynolds v. FilomeoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1951
- De La Motte v. RuckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942
- Van Antwerp v. SmithCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1940
- Huyck v. MerrittCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1952