Legal Opinion

Whitfield v. Debrincat

California Court of Appeal

Decided January 28, 1937No. Civ. 10160PublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BRAY, J., pro tem.

This is an appeal by plaintiff from an order granting defendant a new trial in an action for per-' sonal injuries, after trial before a jury wherein a verdict for $19,000 was rendered for plaintiff. The order granting the new trial was based “on the sole ground of surprise occurring at the trial, which ordinary prudence could' not have guarded against”. This was the second trial of this action; the first one resulted in a verdict for $750 in defendant’s favor and a new trial was granted on the ground of insufficiency of evidence.

The accident occurred on the Skyline Boulevard…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. McGuire v. DrewCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  2. Schellhous v. BallCalifornia Supreme Court · 1866
  3. Delmas v. MartinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1870
  4. Brooks v. DouglassCalifornia Supreme Court · 1867
  5. Rodriguez v. ComstockCalifornia Supreme Court · 1864

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Brandelius v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Mazzotta v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Gray v. RobinsonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939
  4. Kauffman v. De MutiisCalifornia Supreme Court · 1948
  5. Rather v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1947

21 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