Court Opinion

ID: 9740410
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:34:44.975483+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:18.132483
License: Public Domain

Chappell, J.,
concurring.
I find no fault with propositions of law appearing in the opinion and agree with the result, but believe that disposition of the last assignment of error could have been predicated upon another ground.
In this case the trial court evidently concluded either that defendant had not affirmatively pleaded contributory negligence of plaintiff’s decedent, or that there was no evidence to ultimately support such issue if properly pleaded. Therefore, no instruction was given by the trial court upon the question of contributory negligence. *858In that situation plaintiff had the benefit of the failure to submit such issue and cannot complain. The only issue submitted was the alleged negligence of defendant and whether or not it proximately caused the accident and resulting death.
It appears logical to say that in such a case there .can be no necessity of giving an instruction that it was presumed that plaintiff’s decedent was not guilty of negligence in order to avoid prejudicial error, because whether or not he was negligent was never an issue submitted to the jury. Thus, the failure to give such presumptive instruction could not be prejudicial error because it had no place in the issues as ultimately submitted.
Wenke, J., joins in this concurring opinion.