Crockett

Crockett v. Dowling

Good Law
102 Cal. App. 260·1929 Cal. App. LEXIS 82·282 P. 961
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 2, 1929Docket No. 6893.California1,092 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

An appeal by the defendant from a judgment entered against him in an action to recover damages for personal, injuries alleged to have been caused by his negligence. The injuries followed a collision in the city of Santa Cruz between two automobiles driven by the respective parties to the action. The defendant denied that the injuries and damage complained of were due to his negligence, and pleaded contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff. The action was tried before a jury, which rendered a verdict for the plaintiff. As grounds for reversal it is contended that the conduct of plaintiff’s counsel in connection with the giving of certain testimony by the plaintiff constituted prejudicial misconduct, and that the court instructed the jury erroneously.

In the course of the direct examination of plaintiff the following occurred: “ (Direct Examination by Mr. Snyder) : Q. Mr. Crockett, following this collision which you testified to yesterday, was there any conversation had between you and Dr. Dowling at the time of the accident or afterwards? In referring to this conversation I will ask you to first specify, as nearly as you can, where it was had, and also whether any persons…

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.