Florman

Florman v. Patzer

Good Law
133 Cal. App. 358·1933 Cal. App. LEXIS 693·24 P.2d 228
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 19, 1933Docket No. 7656.California1,524 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Houser, J.

While walking west, across the south side of Thirty-seventh Street, in the city of Los Angeles, at a point where Thirty-seventh Street intersects Hill Street, plaintiff was struck by an automobile which at that time was being driven by defendant south on Hill Street. Thirty-seventh Street ends at the west line of Hill Street. In an action brought by plaintiff against defendant for damages which resulted from such accident, plaintiff was awarded a judgment therein for the gross sum of $2,625, of which amount the sum of $2,500 was for general damages, and the sum of $125 was for special damages. From such judgment defendant has appealed to this court.

Although it is admitted by appellant that within the contemplation of the law the accident occurred at an intersection of two streets, and consequently with reference thereto that the law finds its application, nevertheless it is within the contention of appellant that in reaching a conclusion as to whether either defendant was guilty of negligence, or plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, the situation with reference to the particular intersection should have been taken into consideration by the trial court. But conceding…

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.