Meyers

Meyers v. Bradford

Good Law
1921 Cal. App. LEXIS 394·54 Cal. App. 157·201 P. 471
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 6, 1921Civ. No. 2292.California1,635 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Burnett, J.

Plaintiff recovered judgment on a verdict in his favor for four hundred dollars for damages to his automobile received through a collision with the ear of appellants at the intersection of Twenty-fourth and U Streets, in the city of Sacramento, and the appeal is from said judgment. It is not disputed that the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict and judgment in respect to the negligence of defendants, the want of contributory negligence on the part of plaintiff, and the amount of damages awarded. Indeed, there seems to 'be no substantial conflict as to any of these elements involved in the case, and even the testimony of defendants showed them to be chargeable with actionable negligence.

Two points, however, are made by appellants: First, that the court erred in instructing the jury that “it is part of the duty of the operator of a motor vehicle to keep his machine always under control so as to avoid collisions with pedestrians and other persons using the highway. He has no right to assume that the road is clear, but under all circumstances and at all times he must be vigilant and must anticipate and expect the presence of others. Accordingly, the fact that he did not…

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.