Court Opinion

ID: 9560806
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:56:34.825521+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:13:12.921525
License: Public Domain

McGHEE, Justice (specially concurring). The conclusions that neither the plaintiff nor defendant was negligent should be treated as findings of fact, as well as the one wherein it is stated the collision was an unavoidable accident. I do not, however, agree with them. The record shows the collision was caused by the negligence of one or both drivers, and there is no support in my opinion for a finding that this was an unavoidable accident. This judgment should be reversed and remanded for a new trial before a jury or another judge. If the collision was caused by Padilla’s negligence alone then the intervenor could not recover because of the guest statute, but if it was caused by the negligence of the plaintiff or the concurring negligence of the plaintiff and Padilla, then judgment should go against the plaintiff. For the above reasons alone I concur in a reversal of the judgment.