Ritzman

Ritzman v. Mills

Caution
102 Cal. App. 464·1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 187·283 P. 88
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 10, 1929Docket No. 3958.California3,225 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Plummer, J.

The above-named actions are brought by two sisters on account of personal injuries sustained by them from an automobile driven by the defendant while the plaintiffs were crossing a certain street in the city of Pasadena. The actions were consolidated and tried together, submitted to the jury upon the same testimony, and a verdict was returned in each case in the sum of $5,000. The two cases are presented to us upon one transcript, and will be considered as one. From the judgments entered upon the verdicts, the defendant appeals in each case.

The record shows that the plaintiffs were both injured as they were crossing Pasadena Avenue, on April 5, 1926; that the injuries were inflicted by an automobile owned and operated by the defendant. The jury found that the injuries were inflicted by reason of the negligent operation of the automobile, at said time and place, by the defendant.

The defendant’s motion for a new trial being denied, the defendant appeals and presents for our consideration three questions: Error of the court in instructions to the jury; that the damages awarded were and are excessive; and that the court erred in denying the defendant’s motions for a new trial on…

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.