Parodi

Parodi v. City & County of San Francisco

Good Law
160 Cal. App. 2d 577·1958 Cal. App. LEXIS 2156·325 P.2d 224
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 1958Civ. 17710California2,325 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bray, J.

Plaintiff appeals from a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a motion made pursuant to section 630, Code of Civil Procedure (granting a previously denied motion for directed verdict after jury fails to reach a verdict).

Question Presented

Propriety of granting the motion. This depends solely upon whether the variance between the place of accident described in the claim presented to the city and in the original complaint and that described in the amended complaint and in plaintiff’s proof is fatal.

Facts

Plaintiff’s complaint alleged that she was injured while a passenger on defendant’s trolley coach through defendant’s negligent operation of the coach “near the intersection of Steiner and Broadway Streets,” San Francisco. The verified claim which she filed with defendant as required by section 87, San Francisco Charter, stated the place of the accident in identical language. At the trial, plaintiff testified that the accident happened at the intersection of Fillmore and Sutter Streets (some 11 blocks from the other intersection). Defendant's evidence showed that the accident happened at the location given in the claim and the original complaint. Plaintiff was permitted…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.