Court Opinion

ID: 9600966
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 01:33:57.705688+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:01:54.764404
License: Public Domain

On Petition for Rehearing
[Department Two. October 18, 1951.]
Grady, J.
Attention has been called to an error in the foregoing opinion in which we held a cross-appeal was necessary in order that respondents might urge, in support of the judgment dismissing the action, that the appellants were guilty of contributory negligence.
We have given consideration to the argument of respondents on that question and are in accord with the view of the trial court that it could not be said as a matter of law that the existence of such negligence had been established. This conclusion makes all that we said in the opinion upon the question of appeal unnecessary in our review of the judgment, and it may be disregarded.
Schwellenbach, C. J., Mallery, Hamley, and Weaver, JJ., concur.
October 19,1951. Petition for rehearing denied.