Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
Leonard V. Watsonville Community Hospital [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Leonard V. Watsonville Community Hospital [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Grant of nonsuit as to doctor was proper because the testimony of patient's adverse parties was clear and uncontradicted to effect he was not responsible for leaving clamp in patient's abdomen and there was no rational ground to disbelieve testimony.
Tucker V. Lombardo [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Tucker V. Lombardo [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
No prejudicial error existed when the jury instructions correctly informed the jury about the shooter's degree of care in firing a gun on a skeet range and informed the jury about contributory negligence and assumption of the risk.
Danner V. Atkins [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Danner V. Atkins [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
In a case involving a truck's unexplained collision with a building, doctrine of res ipsa loquitur did not apply as to truck driver where the truck was under the control of a mechanic rather than of the driver just before the accident.
Panopulos V. Maderis [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Panopulos V. Maderis [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Passengers who were injured in an accident while they were guests in car, just after the driver stepped out, could not recover for their resulting injuries unless they showed that the driver was intoxicated or engaged in wilful misconduct.
Mccarthy V. Tally, Jesse W. Carter
Mccarthy V. Tally, Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
To recover liquidated damages, lessor had to prove that damages were extremely difficult of ascertainment at the time the parties entered into lease and that the agreed-upon sum represented a reasonable endeavor to ascertain what damages would be.
Hudson V. Rainville [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Hudson V. Rainville [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
In a pedestrian's personal injury action, the trial court properly submitted the issue of an automobile driver's negligence to the jury where the evidence presented a question of fact as to that issue.
Simmons V. Rhodes & Jamieson, Ltd. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Simmons V. Rhodes & Jamieson, Ltd. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Grant of nonsuit was affirmed because welder failed to demonstrate that company that sold him cement breached implied warranty of fitness for particular purpose. Cement was fit for purpose for which it was used, and company was not negligent.