Stringer

Mitchell v. Stringer

Good Law
133 Cal. App. 207·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 527·23 P.2d 765
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 7, 1933Docket No. 8778.California528 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

The above actions, consolidated for the purpose of trial, are for damages resulting from injuries received in a collision of two automobiles.

Plaintiff Wissig, the driver of one of the automobiles, was traveling southerly along the Santa Cruz Mountain highway. With him, as his guests, were plaintiffs Mitchell and Booth. Respondent was driving an automobile northerly on said highway. The two automobiles collided, resulting in the injuries to plaintiffs and the damage to defendant’s automobile. Plaintiffs alleged in their complaints that the collision of said automobiles which resulted in their injuries was caused by the negligence of defendant. The defendant in his answers to the complaints denied that he was negligent, and by his cross-complaint alleged negligence upon the part of plaintiff Wissig and asked judgment for the damages sustained by his automobile. The jury returned a separate verdict in each of the cases in favor of the defendant, except in the Wissig case it returned a verdict against defendant on his cross-complaint. Each of the plaintiffs moved for a new trial and, said motions being denied, separate judgments were rendered in accordance with the verdicts.

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.