Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Series

Golden Gate University School of Law

Personal injury

1952

Articles 1 - 6 of 6

Full-Text Articles in Law

Hamasaki V. Flotho [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Oct 1952

Hamasaki V. Flotho [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The trial court was not required to order a new trial on damage issues alone where damages awarded in a personal injury suit against a driver, the car's owner, and the driver's employer were so low that the jury had clearly compromised on liability.


Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. V. Industrial Acci. Com. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Aug 1952

Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. V. Industrial Acci. Com. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Employee who was injured when he dove into stream located near employer's premises on his free time was not entitled to compensation award under California's Workmen's Compensation Act because his injuries were not incurred in course of employment.


Fireman's Fund Indem. Co. V. Industrial Acci. Com. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Aug 1952

Fireman's Fund Indem. Co. V. Industrial Acci. Com. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The commission improperly awarded the injured employee compensation because her injury occurred while walking as an off-duty diversion of her own free choice. There was no causal connection between the injury and the employment.


Leipert V. Honold [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Aug 1952

Leipert V. Honold [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Partial new trial on damages was improperly ordered as issue of liability was very close and record evidence suggested that award was the result of a compromise, and thus, it would have been unjust to have a new trial limited to issue of damages.


Rose V. Melody Lane Of Wilshire [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Aug 1952

Rose V. Melody Lane Of Wilshire [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

Grant of a new trial in favor of a customer on issue of damages, in his action to recover for personal injuries sustained in the owner's establishment, was improper. The nominal award by the jury indicated indecision as to owner's res ipsa liability.


Sexton V. Brooks [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Jun 1952

Sexton V. Brooks [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

In plaintiff's action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained through a fall on a cement walk, the trial court erroneously instructed the jury on the applicable rules of law, therefore, judgment for plaintiff was improper.