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

Law Commons

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

Automobile accident

Series

Golden Gate University School of Law

Publication Year

Articles 1 - 5 of 5

Full-Text Articles in Law

Hudson V. Rainville [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter May 1956

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 Jul 1955

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.


Scott V. Burke [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Aug 1952

Scott V. Burke [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

It was proper for the trial court to instruct the jury on the inference of negligence under res ipsa loquitur as well as the conflicting presumption of due care that arose if defendant driver was truly unable to recall the cause of the accident.


Rodabaugh V. Tekus [Dissent], Jesse W. Carter Jul 1952

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.


Selinsky V. Olsen, Jesse W. Carter Nov 1951

Selinsky V. Olsen, Jesse W. Carter

Jesse Carter Opinions

The refusal of the trial court to give an instruction on the last clear chance doctrine resulted in the granting of a new trial to plaintiff in a personal injury action resulting from a collision.