Legal Opinion
Honsickle v. Superior Court
California Court of Appeal
Decided January 29, 1999No. B121554PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
CROSKEY, J.
This is the latest in a series of cases which involve the scope and application of Proposition 213, enacted by the voters on November 5, 1996. Essentially, this initiative prohibits (1) recovery of any damages by a convicted felon for injuries caused in the commission of or flight from tiie felony (Civ. Code, § 3333.3) 2 and (2) recovery of noneconomic damages by any drunk driver, uninsured driver or uninsured owner arising out of the operation or use of a motor vehicle. (Civ. Code, § 3333.4) 3 The issue presented here poses the question of whether Civil Code section 3333.4,…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Bearden v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- 20th Century Insurance v. GaramendiCalifornia Supreme Court · 1994
- Lantis v. CondonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1979
- United Services Automobile Assn. v. WarnerCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1976
- Atkins v. StrayhornCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1990
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Wilson v. John Crane, Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2000
- Jenkins v. COUNTY OF LAS ANGELESCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Plotkin v. SAJAHTERA, INC.California Court of Appeal · 2003
- Savnik v. HallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1999
- Landeros v. TorresCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2012
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.