Court Opinion

ID: 9789999
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 01:45:06.502724+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:17:40.287553
License: Public Domain

MR. JUSTICE CASTLES
dissenting:
I dissent.
I agree with the discussion of the majority opinion as to the defense of contributory negligence in a last clear chance case, but do not agree that Instruction 16 amounted to a directed verdict. From the evidence, the jury may have believed that decedent’s negligence in driving without a key and depending on twisted ignition wires was antecedent negligence, but that under the circumstances with a vehicle in that condition, that his failure to stop was the primary and proximate cause of the accident, and that this negligence, in view of the short distance and time involved, was the proximate cause.
In any event, the instructions should be read as a whole and reading them as a whole, Instruction 16 did not am mint, to a directed verdict. In all other particulars I agree with the majority opinion.