McKinley

McKinley v. Dalton

Good Law
128 Cal. App. 298·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 211·17 P.2d 160
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 20, 1932Docket No. 614.California2,421 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Marks, J.

This is an action instituted to recover damages resulting from injuries to Marie L. McKinley, wife of H. G. McKinley, while Mr. and Mrs. McKinley were riding in an automobile as guests of defendant. The trial court found that defendant was guilty of gross negligence which was the proximate cause of the injury, and that H. G. McKinley was guilty of negligence which proximately contributed to the injury of his wife, which negligence was imputed to her. and barred recovery for both. Plaintiifs have appealed from the judgment.

Appellants urge as the sole ground upon which they rely for a reversal of the judgment that the finding that H. G. McKinley was guilty of contributory negligence is not supported by the evidence and is contrary to it. Respondent has made no appearance in this court.

There is practically no conflict in the evidence, the stories of the parties varying in but one minor particular. Respondent, with appellants as his guests, left the Rex Arms Apartments in the city of Los Angeles at about 4:15 o ’clock in the afternoon of February 19, 1931, to drive to the city of Fullerton. Mr. McKinley rode in the front seat beside the driver, with Mrs. McKinley occupying 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.