Wickman

F rom a judgment on verdict in a pedestrian plaintiff’s favor for injuries negligently inflicted by an automobile driven by defendants, the latter appeal for insufficiency of evidence and excessive damages.

At night, while plaintiff was walking westerly across San Pablo Avenue, Berkeley, he was struck by an automobile of the defendant company driven southerly along the avenue by its employee, defendant Lowenstein, and was so injured that the jury awarded him damages for $17,500. After denial of successive motions for nonsuit, directed verdict, judgment non obstante and new trial, defendants appeal on grounds theretofore unsuccessfully urged.

The questions here involved are as follows:

Appellants hereinafter called defendants, contend that, notwithstanding the jury found that the accident in question happened at a pedestrian crossing, the evidence of certain physical facts demonstrates that the plaintiff’s testimony that it occurred there is entirely unworthy of belief, and that therefore the evidence does not establish that the accident was proximately caused by the defendants’ negli gence, and also that the evidence does establish contributory negligence in plaintiff as a…