Court Opinion

ID: 9606938
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 02:54:19.861535+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:02:36.203304
License: Public Domain

TONGrUE, J.,
concurring.
In my opinion, plaintiff was entitled to a clear instruction that negligence of the driver of the ear in which she was a passenger was not to be imputed to her — a rule of law not understood by the ordinary jury and one vital to its proper consideration of this case — and the instruction as given by the court did not make that rule of law clear to the jury. However, in Smith v. Wetherell, 269 Or 91, 99, 523 P2d 1272, 1276 (1974), a case involving similar facts, the majority of this court held that it was not re*161versible error to refuse to give such an instruction, as requested by the plaintiff, and to give an instruction somewhat similar to that given by the trial court in this case. Because of the decision by the majority in that case, in which I dissented, I concur in the result reached by the majority in this case.