Green

Green v. Southern Pacific Co.

Good Law
122 Cal. 563·1898 Cal. LEXIS 633·55 P. 577
Supreme Court of CaliforniaDecember 7, 1898L. A. No. 393California1,878 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fleet, J.

Action by the widow and children of George E". Green to recover damages suffered by them as heirs at law of said George El Green, through his death, alleged to-have been occasioned by defendant’s negligence. Plaintiffs had judgment, and defendant appeals therefrom and from an order denying a new trial.

It will not be necessary to notice the ground of contributory negligence by deceased, urged by appellant, nor that of excessive damages, since those questions will not necessarily arise upon another trial, and the judgment and order must be reversed because of errors of law occurring at the trial of the case, to the manifest prejudice of the defendant.

1. The trial court very clearly committed prejudicial error in admitting before the jury, over defendant’s objection, the testimony of the witness Hayes, to the effect that the plaintiff Salona Green, one of the daughters of deceased, who was living with him at his death, had no property of her own upon which to maintain herself. This evidence had no pertinent or competent bearing upon the extent of injury suffered by plaintiffs, for which defendant could be held responsible^ and its only effect and inevitable tendency was…

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.