Legal Opinion

Von Arx v. City of Burlingame

California Court of Appeal

Decided August 7, 1936No. Civ. 9830PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WARD, J., pro tem.

Plaintiff brought this action for damages for personal injuries against the defendants City of Burlingame, a municipal corporation, and two employees 1 hereof, members of the police department. During the trial, the action was dismissed against one of the defendant police officers. Judgment was entered in favor of plaintiff, upon a verdict of a jury, against the remaining defendants, the police officer and the City of Burlingame. The motion for a new trial on behalf of defendants was granted to the defendant police officer and denied to the City of Burlingame. The last named…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Silver v. SilverSupreme Court of the United States · 1929
  2. Zibbell v. Southern Pacific Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Abeel v. ClarkCalifornia Supreme Court · 1890
  4. Norton v. City of PomonaCalifornia Supreme Court · 1935
  5. Heron v. RileyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1930

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Lucas v. City of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1938
  2. Flournoy v. State of CaliforniaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1964
  3. Huffaker v. DeckerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1946
  4. Veriddo v. RenaudCalifornia Supreme Court · 1950
  5. Helbach v. City of Long BeachCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

6 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