Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
Alarid V. Vanier [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Alarid V. Vanier [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Although a driver rear-ended another car, there was sufficient evidence for a jury to conclude that the driver took reasonable steps to maintain his brakes, and therefore the driver was able to overcome the statutory presumption of negligence.
Dow V. Holly Mfg. Co., Jesse W. Carter
Dow V. Holly Mfg. Co., Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
A general contractor was liable for the negligent installation of a defective gas heater by one of its subcontractors, which caused the death of members of a family residing in the home.
Ambriz V. Petrolane, Ltd., Jesse W. Carter
Ambriz V. Petrolane, Ltd., Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Parents' wrongful death judgments for deaths of their children due to an explosion in their home was upheld against a gas distributor who was liable for independent contractors it employed to deliver the gas, an abnormally dangerous activity.
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.
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.
Hilyar V. Union Ice Co., Jesse W. Carter
Hilyar V. Union Ice Co., Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
Nonsuit as to driver was improper in injured minor's personal injury action because evidence was sufficient on negligence issue to permit submission to jury but nonsuit was proper as to corporation because evidence of agency was insufficient.
Jensen V. Minard [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jensen V. Minard [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The trial court erred in giving certain instructions requested by defendant because the jury should not have been foreclosed from considering evidence provided by the happening of the accident itself in determining whether defendant was negligent.
Saporito V. Purex Corp. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Saporito V. Purex Corp. [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The evidence supported the finding that a manufacturer was liable in negligence to party who was injured when a glass bottle of a bleaching solution prepared and bottled by the manufacturer burst in her hands.
Rodabaugh V. Tekus [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Rodabaugh V. Tekus [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter
Jesse Carter Opinions
The doctrine of last clear chance rarely applied in cases involving high speed collisions between vehicles because it was extremely difficult to determine which party, if any, had a meaningful last clear chance to avoid an accident.