Search for: "Thing v. La Chusa (1989)"
Results 1 - 11
of 11
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
18 Mar 2016, 2:04 pm
La Chusa, 48 Cal.3d 644, 668 (1989). [read post]
30 Jul 2015, 9:56 am
La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644, 667-668.) [read post]
13 Jul 2013, 10:38 am
La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644, which further defined how close to the accident scene the person needs to be to make this claim. [read post]
1 Mar 2011, 10:00 am
La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644, 668. [read post]
26 Jun 2010, 8:11 am
La Chusa, (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644, is the utmost authority when evaluating whether Mr. [read post]
23 Mar 2010, 8:40 am
La Chusa" is not present here, and Paul Green's cause of action for NIED fails. [read post]
14 Oct 2009, 8:16 am
La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644. [read post]
13 Oct 2009, 8:49 am
La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal. 3d 644 and its progeny to argue that because none of the Plaintiffs were related to Sherrie Johnson or even actually witnessed her death. [read post]
5 Jun 2009, 11:27 pm
La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644, to claim emotional distress from injury to her child because the mother is a direct victim. [read post]
22 Jan 2009, 2:06 am
Then things happened. [read post]
15 Aug 2007, 3:03 pm
La Chusa (1989) 48 Cal.3d 644, 667 (Thing), the Supreme Court held only "closely related percipient witnesses" may seek damages for emotional distress caused by observing the negligently inflicted injury of a third person and specificallylimited recovery to a plaintiff who "is present at the scene of the injury-producing event at the time it occurs and is then aware that it is causing injury to the victim. [read post]
