Bernstein

Bernstein v. Cunningham

Good Law
1 Cal. Rptr. 234·176 Cal. App. 2d 283·1959 Cal. App. LEXIS 1481
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 16, 1959Civ. No. 23676California1,204 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Shinn, J.

The present action was instituted by Bernstein against Cunningham and Rheingold Brewing Company seeking damages for injuries to plaintiff when the car which he was driving was struck in the rear by the car driven by Cunningham allegedly as the agent of Rheingold. In a non-jury trial judgment of nonsuit was rendered in favor of Rheingold and findings and judgment were in favor of plaintiff against Cunningham in the amount of $1,500. In ruling upon plaintiff’s motion for a new trial the court modified its find *285 ings and judgment and substituted the amount of $2,500 for the sum previously awarded and also gave plaintiff judgment against Cunningham for costs in the amount of $155.05.

Bheingold filed a memorandum of costs claiming $181.75. Plaintiff’s motion to tax costs and strike the cost bill was denied in part but the amount claimed was reduced to $59.36. Plaintiff appeals from the judgment and the order denying his motion to strike the cost bill. The appeal is on the clerk’s transcript.

The first ground of appeal is inadequacy of the damages, and the claim is based entirely upon the court’s findings.

In addition to finding the facts of the accident and negligence of…

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.