Court Opinion

ID: 9711643
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:35:48.916332+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:06.439383
License: Public Domain

Grimes, C.J.,
dissenting:
In my view the plaintiff’s failure to cross at the crosswalk, even if it were an act of negligence, was as a matter of law a mere condition of and not a proximate cause of the accident. The fact that she crossed other than at the crosswalk merely put her where she was. RSA 262-A:34 I defines her duty if she chose not to cross at a crosswalk. If she obeyed that duty in crossing where she did she cannot be found legally at fault because she did not cross somewhere else.
Brock, J., joins in this dissent.