Fitzpatrick

Fitzpatrick v. Haskell

Good Law
117 Cal. App. 684·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 488·4 P.2d 580
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 26, 1931Docket No. 516.California781 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Allison, J.

This action was tried before a jury. The plaintiff was awarded a judgment in the sum of $3,000 as damages for personal injuries sustained when an automobile operated by the defendants collided with an automobile driven by the plaintiff. The collision occurred on the twelfth day of July, 1926, at the intersection of Alvarado Street and Twelfth Street in the city of Los Angeles. From this judgment the defendants appeal.

It is first contended by the appellants that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict and judgment. Counsel’s argument in support of his contention is based entirely upon a discussion of the weight of the evidence. We have examined the record which shows a substantial conflict in the evidence adduced by the whole ease concerning the cause of the collision and the conduct of the parties at the time of, as well as before and immediately following the accident.

“It is the well settled and generally well understood rule that a judgment may not be reversed for insufficiency of evidence when the evidence adduced upon the whole case is in conflict and that upon appeal with the evidence in that situation no inquiry may be made concerning the preponderance of the…

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.