Bakity

Plaintiff was injured in a two-car intersection collision. He brought the present action against the County of Riverside on the theory that the accident was caused by a dangerous condition of public property. Following a jury verdict and judgment for plaintiff, defendant unsuccessfully moved for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial. Defendant appeals from the orders denying the two motions and from the judgment.

Although defendant seeks reversal on several grounds, the thrust of its appeal is that there was no substantial evidence of its liability.

It is axiomatic that a reviewing court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party prevailing below. (Waller v. Southern Pacific Co., 66 Cal.2d 201, 204 [ 57 Cal.Rptr. 353 , 424 P.2d 937 ]; Estate of Teel, 25 Cal.2d 520, 527 [ 154 P.2d 384 ]; Crawford v. Southern Pacific Co., 3 Cal.2d 427, 429 [ 45 P.2d 183 ].) As so viewed, the evidence may be summarized as follows:

The accident occurred at about 7 p.m. on April 2, 1965, at the intersection of two county highways, Avenue 51, an east-west street, and Calhoun Street, a north-south street. Avenue 51 was controlled by stop signs.…