Case Name: Philip J. DE FAZIO and Calvert Fire Insurance Company, a Corporation, Appellants, v. The HERTZ CORPORATION, Appellee
Court: District of Columbia Municipal Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: District of Columbia
Decision Date: 1962-02-13
Citations: 177 A.2d 720
Docket Number: No. 2886
Parties: Philip J. DE FAZIO and Calvert Fire Insurance Company, a Corporation, Appellants, v. The HERTZ CORPORATION, Appellee.
Judges: Before QUINN, Associate Judge, CAY-TON (Chief Judge, Retired) sitting by designation under Code § 11-776 (b) and MYERS, Associate Judge of The Municipal Court for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation.
Reporter: West's Atlantic Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 177
Pages: 720–720

Head Matter:
Philip J. DE FAZIO and Calvert Fire Insurance Company, a Corporation, Appellants, v. The HERTZ CORPORATION, Appellee.
No. 2886.
Municipal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
Argued Jan. 22, 1962.
Decided Feb. 13, 1962.
Hyman L. Rosenberg, Washington, D. C., with whom Sol Friedman and Leonard L. Lipshultz, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellants.
Frederick H. Livingstone, Washington, D. C., for appellee. Paul J. Sedgwick, Washington, D. C., also entered an appearance for appellee.
Before QUINN, Associate Judge, CAY-TON (Chief Judge, Retired) sitting by designation under Code § 11-776 (b) and MYERS, Associate Judge of The Municipal Court for the District of Columbia, sitting by designation.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Two motorists were approaching an intersection from opposite directions, and the traffic light was green for both. Plaintiff intended to drive straight through the intersection and- defendant's driver started to turn left, that being the only direction he could take because of the signs there posted. The two automobiles came together, the front of plaintiff's vehicle striking the right side of defendant's vehicle. The trial court found defendant's driver negligent and that plaintiff was contributorily negligent, and denied plaintiff's claim and defendant's counterclaim. Plaintiff has appealed, challenging the finding of contributory negligence.
From plaintiff's testimony in open court and defendant's interrogatories, the trial judge was to form a judgment as to the speed and relative distances of the two vehicles from the intersection, their positions just before and at the time of collision, and related factors bearing on primary and contributory negligence. The record would not justify us in holding that his decision was wrong as a matter of law.
Under applicable traffic regulations plaintiff had the right of way over defendant attempting to make a left turn; but such right of way was relative, not absolute.
Affirmed.