Wieck

Wieck v. Hockett

Good Law
115 Cal. App. 600·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 765·2 P.2d 476
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 23, 1931Docket No. 4323.California1,378 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Preston, J.

This is an appeal by the defendant H. Hamaguchi from a judgment entered against him upon a verdict of a jury in the sum of $3,750 in‘a case for personal injuries.

Plaintiff Birdene Wieck, a minor, and W. A. Wieck, her father brought this action for damages against defendants, William Hockett and H. Hamaguchi, charging that Birdene Wieck was severely and permanently injured by reason of the negligent operation by said defendants of their respective automobiles. No judgment was entered against William Hockett.

The answer of H. Hamaguchi denies any negligence on his part, and as a separate defense, alleges negligence on the part of plaintiff, constituting the sole and proximate cause of her injuries.

The accident occurred on the twenty-seventh day of November, 1928, at about 11 o’clock in the morning at the intersection of Walnut Avenue and Sultana Drive situate about one mile east of the town of Livingston, in Merced County. Walnut Avenue and Sultana Drive, including the intersection thereof, are dirt roads about 40 feet in width between the property lines. Walnut Avenue, which runs east and west, had been graded and smoothed off just before the accident, so that practically 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.