Doolin v. Omnibus Cable Co.
California Supreme Court
APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco, granting a new trial conditionally and for failure to comply with the condition. A. A. Sanderson, Judge. The facts are stated in the opinion.
1Opinion of the Court
BRITT, C.
Defendant, a street railway corporation, was engaged in the business of transporting passengers for hire on certain streets of the city of San Francisco. On November 17,1891, the plaintiff, Mary J. Doolin, wife of Michael J. Doolin, who joins with her in this action, was a passenger on one of defendant’s cars; the driver in charge thereof lost control of the horses by which the car was drawn and they pulled the car from the track and down an embankment; plaintiffs allege in their complaint that this was in consequence of the negligence of the defendant and its servant, the driver,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Harrison v. Sutter Street RailwayCalifornia Supreme Court · 1897
- Domico v. CasassaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1894
- Lee v. S. Pac. R.R. Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
- Townsend v. BriggsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1891
- Mills v. Oregon Ry. & Navigation Co.California Supreme Court · 1894
3Cited by32 opinions
- Neal v. Farmers Insurance ExchangeCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
- Stevens v. Parke, Davis & Co.California Supreme Court · 1973
- Grimshaw v. Ford Motor Co.California Court of Appeal · 1981
- Sinz v. OwensCalifornia Supreme Court · 1949
- Sprague v. Equifax, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 1985
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.