Harlow

Harlow v. Motor Coach Co.

Good Law
127 Cal. App. 728·1932 Cal. App. LEXIS 325·16 P.2d 779
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 29, 1932Docket No. 7246.California774 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Craig, J.

As the result of three actions which arose from allegedly negligent, operation of a motor-bus and a private automobile at an intersection of public thoroughfares, consolidated for the purposes of trial, judgments were rendered in favor of the plaintiffs. The defendants presented several appeals therefrom upon the same transcript. The instant appeal is from the judgment entered in favor of the-owner and operator of the car last mentioned.

The grounds assigned for reversal consist of an asserted insufficiency of the evidence to warrant findings by the trial court as to negligence of the defendants, and that there was no contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff, but. that the sole proximate cause of his injuries and damage was the negligence of the appellant Tappin. It appeared, and is not denied, that the bus of the appellant corporation, driven by said Tappin, approached the intersection while traveling in a southerly direction and that the respondent when first seen by him was driving easterly across his course and in plain view. The respondent testified that while driving on the right-hand side of the easterly and westerly street at about eight miles per hour, as he…

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.