Legal Opinion

Pope v. Wenisch

California Court of Appeal

Decided November 18, 1930No. Docket No. 7399PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtSpence, J.

Plaintiffs brought an action against defendant for damages resulting from an automobile collision. After a judgment in favor of defendant on a trial by jury, a new trial was granted. The defendant appeals from the order granting the new trial.

The order read “Motion for new trial granted.” It will, therefore, be presumed that it was not based upon the ground of the insufficiency of the evidence. (Code Civ. Proc., sec. 657.) In support of the trial court’s order granting the new trial respondents rely upon error in the instructions to the jury.

Appellant’s first contention is that the new trial…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Rush v. LagomarsinoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
  2. Pierce v. United Gas and Electric Co.California Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Starr v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1921
  4. Thompson v. Cal. Construction Co.California Supreme Court · 1905
  5. Sinan v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.California Court of Appeal · 1930

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Brandelius v. City & County of San FranciscoCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  2. Mazzotta v. Los Angeles Railway Corp.California Supreme Court · 1944
  3. Conroy v. PerezCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1944
  4. Scott v. RenzCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1945
  5. Springer v. SodestromCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1942

9 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