Legal Opinion

Plyer v. Pac. Portland Cement Co.

California Supreme Court

Decided October 2, 1907No. Sac. No. 1452PublishedCited by 28 opinions

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. C. H. Wilson, Peter F. Dunne, A. A. Moore, and Stanley Moore, for Appellant.

1Opinion of the CourtBeatty, C. J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries in which the plaintiff recovered a judgment for twenty-five hundred dollars, from which the defendant appeals.

The only questions presented for decision arise out of the refusal of the trial judge to direct the jury to return a special verdict upon certain issues or particular questions of fact. A number of rather technical objections to the form and manner and time of presenting the request for this direction are urged by respondent in justification of its refusal, and in order to a proper consideration of most of these objections it will be…

2Cited by28 opinions

  1. Hasson v. Ford Motor Co.California Supreme Court · 1977
  2. Stein v. United R.R. of S.F.California Supreme Court · 1911
  3. Luck v. Southern Pacific Transportation Co.California Court of Appeal · 1990
  4. Pigeon v. W. P. Fuller & Co.California Supreme Court · 1909
  5. King v. SchumacherCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1939

23 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