Maggart

Maggart v. Bell

Good Law
116 Cal. App. 306·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 295·2 P.2d 516
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 26, 1931Docket No. 7855.California1,750 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Spence, J.

The above-entitled cases were consolidated for the purpose of trial and pursuant to stipulation and order were consolidated for the purpose of appeal. In the trial court judgments were entered upon the verdicts in favor of plaintiffs Sarah J. Maggart and Anna Devany in the sums of $5,000 and $4,000, respectively, for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of defendant. From these judgments defendant appeals.

Appellant first contends that he was prevented from having a fair trial by reason of prejudicial conduct on the part of respondents’ counsel in intimating to the jury that appellant was insured. We find no merit in this contention. After the court had propounded certain questions to the jurors, respondents’ counsel asked, “Has anyone of you been employed by the Pacific Casualty Automobile Association?” Appellant objected to the question and the objection was overruled. It is not contended that such questions are improper when asked in good faith for the purpose of securing a jury free from bias and prejudice (Girard v. Irvine, 97 Cal. App. 377 [ 275 Pac. 840 ]), but it is contended that this question was not asked in good faith. There is nothing in…

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.