Deike v. East Bay Street Railways, Ltd.
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
BURROUGHS, J., pro tem.
This is an action for personal injuries alleged to have been suffered by the plaintiff as the result of the negligent operation of a street car owned by the defendant company and under the immediate control of its eodefendant Hayden. At the close of the evidence the court directed the jury to return a verdict for both defendants, which direction having been complied with, judgment was entered for defendants, and the plaintiff has appealed therefrom. The court directed the verdict in favor of the defendants on the ground that plaintiff was as a matter of law guilty of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Estate of LancesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1932
- Scott v. San Bernardino Valley Traction Co.California Supreme Court · 1908
- Estate of CasparCalifornia Supreme Court · 1916
- Estate of SharonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1918
- Finkler v. PurcellCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Fischer v. KeenCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1941
- Flores v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1936
- Gibb v. CleaveCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1936
- Levin v. BrownCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947
- Amendt v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1941
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.