From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

White v. Western Fish Co.

Court of Appeal of California, First District
May 16, 1918
37 Cal.App. 261 (Cal. Ct. App. 1918)

Opinion

Civ. No. 2288.

May 16, 1918.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco. Daniel C. Deasy, Judge.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Wm. M. Madden, for Appellant.

Harry I. Stafford, for Respondents.


The appellant, Antonio Trapani, while driving his automobile at the intersection of Webster and Geary Streets in the city of San Francisco one stormy night, collided with a taxicab owned by the plaintiffs. The trial court gave judgment against Trapani for $520.05, and from this judgment he appeals.

The appeal presents nothing but the disputed question of fact whether the collision was due to the negligence of the plaintiff's driver or the defendant Trapani. The evidence, as is usual in such cases, is conflicting and contradictory. The trial court accepted the statements of plaintiff's witnesses. We have examined the record with care and find no reason to disturb the findings of the trial court.

Complaint is made that the damages awarded were too large, but on this subject also the testimony was conflicting, and it was a question for the trial court to determine.

The judgment is affirmed.

A petition for a rehearing of this cause was denied by the district court of appeal on June 15, 1918.


Summaries of

White v. Western Fish Co.

Court of Appeal of California, First District
May 16, 1918
37 Cal.App. 261 (Cal. Ct. App. 1918)
Case details for

White v. Western Fish Co.

Case Details

Full title:GUSTIN WHITE et al., Copartners, etc., Respondents, v. WESTERN FISH…

Court:Court of Appeal of California, First District

Date published: May 16, 1918

Citations

37 Cal.App. 261 (Cal. Ct. App. 1918)
173 P. 934

Citing Cases

Beverly Finance Co. v. American Casualty Co.

Where the evidence as to the amount of damages is conflicting, the question is for the trial court to…