Kirkpatrick

Kirkpatrick v. Damianakes

Good Law
15 Cal. App. 2d 446·1936 Cal. App. LEXIS 78·59 P.2d 556
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 15, 1936Civ. 10091California1,957 words

Opinion

Opinion

Spence, J.

This is an appeal by defendants from a judgment in favor of plaintiff in an action brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained in an automobile accident.

It was alleged in the complaint that plaintiff was operating a sedan in a “private street or alley” when the defendant truck driver “so negligently and carelessly operated” a Dodge truck that it collided with the sedan and injured plaintiff. The answer denied any negligence or carelessness on the part of defendants and charged plaintiff with contributory negligence. There was practically no conflict in the evidence produced upon the trial. It was sufficient to sustain a judgment in favor of plaintiff if defendants were under a duty to exercise ordinary care toward plaintiff. On the other hand, it is apparently conceded that it was insufficient to sustain a judgment in favor of plaintiff if defendants were merely under a duty to refrain from wilfully or wantonly injuring plaintiff. In view of the points raised on this appeal, it becomes necessary to examine the status of the parties in order to determine the duty owed to plaintiff by defendants.

The territory upon which the accident occurred is referred to in the…

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.