Baker

Baker v. Peck

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 2d 231·1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1256·36 P.2d 404
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 3, 1934Civ. 5065California2,346 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pullen, J.

This is an action brought by plaintiff against defendant for recovery of compensatory and punitive damages resulting from a battery committed by defendant upon plaintiff on May 15, 1933, in the city of Merced. The plaintiff in the action alleges damages of $5-,000 for an assault with premeditation and malice, and for exemplary damages of $50,000.

The answer of defendant admitted the striking of plaintiff, but alleged that no damage was done to plaintiff • thereby and further alleged that he struck in self-defense. A jury was impaneled and a general verdict was returned in favor of plaintiff for $6,500. This is an appeal from the judgment entered upon such verdict, and from the order denying a motion for a new trial.

It is urged for reversal that error was committed in regard to the admission of certain testimony and in the giving and refusal to give certain instructions; that the attorney for plaintiff, as well as the jury, were guilty of misconduct and that the verdict was excessive. For a proper understanding of the issues, it will be necessary to set forth the salient facts.

Defendant is an attorney who maintains his offices in San Francisco and also owns and operates…

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.