Kinney

Kinney v. King

Good Law
1920 Cal. App. LEXIS 570·47 Cal. App. 390·190 P. 834
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 7, 1920Civ. No. 3309.California1,647 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Richards, J.

This is an appeal from an order granting a new trial in an action for damages resulting from an automobile collision. The plaintiffs upon the trial of the action before a jury were awarded a verdict in the sum of five thousand dollars damages. The defendant moved for a new trial upon several statutory grounds. The court granted said motion by an order which read as follows: “Defendant’s motion for a new trial is granted solely upon the ground that, conceding the evidence given by the plaintiffs to be true, plaintiffs were not as a matter of law entitled to recover.”

The plaintiffs have appealed from this order, and upon such appeal urge the single point that the trial court was in error in holding that the plaintiffs were guilty of contributory negligence, which, as a matter of law, would bar their recovery in this action. The respondent maintains" that the trial court was right in so holding, and also undertakes to contend that there were certain other errors occurring at the trial which entitled him to a new trial, and devotes much space to a discussion of these alleged errors. We are of the opinion, however, that these matters are not proper subject of discussion upon this…

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.