Housley

Housley v. Godinez

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 316·4 Cal. App. 4th 737·6 Cal. Rptr. 2d 111·92 Daily Journal DAR 3534·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2259
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 13, 1992F014170California3,245 words

Opinion

Opinion

Martin, J.

This personal injury action arose when a Dodge Ram pickup truck owned by defendant Randy Housley and driven by defendant Daniel A. Godinez, in which plaintiff Jerald B. Housley was riding as a passenger, collided with a land plane owned by defendant Alexander Lehman. Plaintiff sued for catastrophic injuries he allegedly received as a result of the accident. The defendants raised defenses of contributory negligence: (1) the failure of the passenger plaintiff to wear seat belts and (2) knowingly and voluntarily assuming a risk of accident by riding in the vehicle operated by defendant Godinez.

Jury trial commenced on December 6, 1989. Over plaintiff’s objections, the trial court instructed the jury in the language of BAJI No. 4.31 on reasonable implied assumption of risk and Vehicle Code section 27315 as part of the “seat belt defense.” On December 20, 1989, the jury returned a special verdict in favor of the plaintiff which provided that, without taking into consideration the reduction of damages due to the negligence of the plaintiff, if any, the total amount of damages sustained by the plaintiff as a proximate result of the accident amounted to $31,205.68. The verdict…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.