Thomas v. Smith

California Court of Appeal

Thomas v. Smith

38 P.2d 827, 2 Cal. App. 2d 701, 1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1498

CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal

DecidedDecember 8, 1934

DocketCiv. 8857

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 38 P.2d 827 (Thomas v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Thomas v. Smith, 38 P.2d 827, 2 Cal. App. 2d 701, 1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1498 (Cal. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

SCOTT, J., pro tem.

Plaintiffs, husband and wife, sued for damages resulting from an automobile accident. The *702 jury returned a verdict for William Thomas for $1,041, and a separate verdict for Winifred Thomas for $1500. Separate judgments were thereupon entered for said amounts. Upon filing of cost bill defendants moved to strike it on the ground that each judgment was for less than $2,000. From order denying such motion they appeal.

The two causes of action, to wit, that of the wife for personal injury and of the husband for consequential damage, were properly joined under section 427 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Appellants were not entitled as a matter of right to have the separate awards segregated in the verdict or judgment. (Bock v. Hamilton Square Baptist Church, 219 Cal. 284 [26 Pac. (2d) 7].) The fact that the trial court permitted such a divided verdict and judgment cannot operate to deprive plaintiffs of the costs to which they are entitled under section 1022 of the Code of Civil Procedure, since the total judgment was over $2,000 and was in excess of the jurisdiction of the municipal court.

Order affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Grail, J., concurred.

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

SCOTT, J., pro tem.

Plaintiffs, husband and wife, sued for damages resulting from an automobile accident. The *702 jury returned a verdict for William Thomas for $1,041, and a separate verdict for Winifred Thomas for $1500. Separate judgments were thereupon entered for said amounts. Upon filing of cost bill defendants moved to strike it on the ground that each judgment was for less than $2,000. From order denying such motion they appeal.

The two causes of action, to wit, that of the wife for personal injury and of the husband for consequential damage, were properly joined under section 427 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Appellants were not entitled as a matter of right to have the separate awards segregated in the verdict or judgment. (Bock v. Hamilton Square Baptist Church, 219 Cal. 284 [26 Pac. (2d) 7].) The fact that the trial court permitted such a divided verdict and judgment cannot operate to deprive plaintiffs of the costs to which they are entitled under section 1022 of the Code of Civil Procedure, since the total judgment was over $2,000 and was in excess of the jurisdiction of the municipal court.

Order affirmed.

Stephens, P. J., and Grail, J., concurred.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 P.2d 827, 2 Cal. App. 2d 701, 1934 Cal. App. LEXIS 1498, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-smith-calctapp-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack