Bagwill

Bagwill v. Pacific Electric Railway Co.

Good Law
1928 Cal. App. LEXIS 81·90 Cal. App. 114·265 P. 517
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 14, 1928Docket No. 6276.California2,546 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Parker, J.

These actions arose out of the same state of facts as will hereinafter appear. By order of court and stipulation of counsel the actions were consolidated for trial.

The plaintiff Bagwill in the first action was the employee of Consolidated Lumber Company, plaintiff in the second action. While employed as a truck driver and while operating the truck of the Consolidated Lumber Company the plaintiff Bagwill collided with a train of cars owned and operated by defendant Pacific Electric Railway Company, and out of this collision the two actions arose. Bagwill sued for damages resulting to himself, and the lumber company brought the action for damage to the truck.

Upon the conclusion of the testimony offered on behalf of both plaintiffs the court below granted defendant’s motion for a nonsuit in both cases. Hence the appeals, which present the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to justify a submission of the ease to the jury.

In considering the court’s ruling on the motion for nonsuit the established facts must be viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff (Young v. Southern Pac. Co., 189 Cal. 754 [ 210 Pac. 259 ]).

The accident occurred in the county of Los Angeles at…

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.