Laughlin v. State

California Supreme Court

Laughlin v. State

19 Cal. 2d 875

CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

DecidedMarch 4, 1942

DocketS. F. No. 16039

StatusPublished

This text of 19 Cal. 2d 875 (Laughlin v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Laughlin v. State, 19 Cal. 2d 875 (Cal. 1942).

Pincite

Opinion

CARTER, J. —

Defendant herein appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County in favor of plaintiff, awarding $7,500 for the damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff as the result of the construction of a subway in the street fronting her property. This is one of a series of similar cases in which the facts, rights and liabilities, are substantially the same. All material legal questions here presented are disposed of in a decision this day filed in the case of Bose [876]*876v. State of California, No. 16040, ante, p. 713 [123 Pac. (2d) 505], Upon the authorities there cited and for the reasons there given, the judgment herein is affirmed.

Shenk, J., Curtis, J., and Houser, J., concurred.

Appellant’s petition for a rehearing was denied April 2, 1942. Gibson, C. J., Edmonds, J., and Traynor, J., voted for a rehearing.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

CARTER, J. —

Defendant herein appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court of Alameda County in favor of plaintiff, awarding $7,500 for the damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff as the result of the construction of a subway in the street fronting her property. This is one of a series of similar cases in which the facts, rights and liabilities, are substantially the same. All material legal questions here presented are disposed of in a decision this day filed in the case of Bose [876]*876v. State of California, No. 16040, ante, p. 713 [123 Pac. (2d) 505], Upon the authorities there cited and for the reasons there given, the judgment herein is affirmed.

Shenk, J., Curtis, J., and Houser, J., concurred.

Appellant’s petition for a rehearing was denied April 2, 1942. Gibson, C. J., Edmonds, J., and Traynor, J., voted for a rehearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

19 Cal. 2d 875, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/laughlin-v-state-cal-1942.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack