Deagle

The only point urged upon this, an appeal from a judgment for damages in favor of respondent and against appellant in the sum of fifteen thousand dollars for the death of respondent’s father, is that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the judgment.

The decedent, at the time he received the injuries from which he subsequently, died, was riding as a guest in an automobile driven by defendant Davidson. At the intersection of Broderick and Post Streets in the city of San Francisco Davidson’s ear collided with the one driven by his co-defendant Shane, appellant herein. The complaint charges them as joint tort-feasors, and the jury, by rendering a verdict against both, found each guilty of negligence contributing to the accident and the death resulting therefrom. The negligence, if any, of both Shane and Davidson lay in the speed at which they drove and the manner in which they operated their respective automobiles. On the question of excessive speed and on the question of who first entered the intersection, claiming thereby the right of way, the evidence is conflicting.

Appellant recognizes the well-established rule that an appellate court will not disturb a verdict of a jury or…