G. W. Woo v. Low Chew

Good Law
128 Cal. App. 235·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 221·16 P.2d 1001
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 17, 1932Docket No. 8472.California761 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

The first of the above actions was brought by the father of Wilton Woo, a minor, to recover the expense incurred in connection with injuries alleged to have been suffered by the minor; and the second was for the recovery by the minor of damages due to the same injuries.

It was alleged that the injuries resulted from the negligence of defendants. The cases were consolidated for trial and tried by a jury. It returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. A motion for a new trial was made and granted on the ground that the verdict was not justified by the evidence.

The appeal is from this order, it being defendants’ claim that there was no substantial evidence of negligence on their part proximately causing the injuries, and that, as to the action brought by the minor’s father, the evidence shows as a matter of law that the father was guilty of contributory negligence.

The injuries occurred in the Chinese quarter of San Francisco on a street known as Beckett Street, which is a one-way thoroughfare twelve feet three inches in width between the curbs. The father of the minor operates a store upon this street. At the time his injuries were received the minor was a little less than…

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.