Case ID: sw2d_273/html/0816-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Finley ARNETT et al., Appellants, v. Howard HENSLEY, Appellee.
    Court of Appeals of Kentucky.
    Dec. 17, 1954.
    Marcus Mann, Salyersville, for appellants.
    Nickell & Walter, Gardner & Gabbard, West Liberty, for appellee.
   PER CURIAM.

We are affirming .the $600 judgment in favor of the appellee because we think (1) the question of the plaintiff’s contributory negligence was for the jury; and (2) the instruction objected to. was not improper, in view of the positive testimony' of' the-officers who measured the visibility distance at-the curve: where the accident occurred, and which made KRS 189.400 ap-’ plicable to the case.

The motion for an appeal is overruled, and the judgment .is |ffirmed.