Huey

On the twenty-fifth day of June, 1929, the City of Los Angeles was the owner and engaged in the operation of a drawbridge, spanning a channel used and fiiaintained by the city for the purpose of ingress and egress of ships, and connecting with a public highway. On said day Joseph Huey, a thirteen year old boy, was accidentally killed on said bridge. This action was brought by the father of said minor child to recover damages for the wrongful death of said Joseph Huey, which the plaintiff claims was caused by negligence of the defendant in its management and operation of said bridge.

By the complaint it was alleged, and the fact is not denied, that at the time of said accident the board of harbor commissioners of the city was charged with the duty of operating, maintaining and controlling the bridge, and that one Burt Edwards was the duly appointed and acting manager and chief administrative officer of said board, and that the defendant Hal Young was the person in charge of and en gaged in the operation of said drawbridge at the time of the accident.

The trial of the action resulted in a judgment of dismissal, which, as recited in the judgment, came about in this way: “It having…