Davis v. California Street Cable Railroad

Citations

• 105 Cal. 131
• 38 P. 647
• 1894 Cal. LEXIS 1125

Syllabus

<p>Negligence—Questions of Law and Fact.—In an action for negligence, where the facts are doubtful as the result of uncertain evidence or conflicting testimony, the question of negligence or conflicting evidence should be submitted to the jury; but where the facts are not doubtful, nor the evidence conflicting, the question is one of law for the court.</p> <p>Id. — Contributory Negligence — Fall Over Rail Left upon the Sidewalk—Knowledge—Forgetfulness of Danger.—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries arising from falling over a rail left by a street railroad company upon the sidewalk, which the railroad company was expecting to use in the construction of switches, where it appears that the plaintiff not only knew the rail was there, but had seen others fall over it, and the fall of the plaintiff was caused by going upon the street for mere curiosity, in forgetfulness of the presence of the rail, the plaintiff is chargeable with contributory negligence, as matter of law, barring her recovery for the injury.</p> <p>Id.—Violation of Ordinance — Lighted Lantern — Gaslight.—The fact that an ordinance of the city required the defendant to keep a lighted lantern at the rail, and that such ordinance was not observed, did not absolve the plaintiff from the obligation to use reasonable care if the plaintiff knew of the existence of the rail, and if the purpose of the requirement of a lighted lantern to enable persons using the sidewalk to see the rail was served by the gaslight.</p> <p>Id.—Directing Verdict for Defendant.—The court may withdraw a case of negligence from the jury and direct a verdict for the defendant, where the evidence is undisputed, or is of such conclusive character that the court, in the exercise of sound judicial discretion, will be compelled to set aside a verdict returned in opposition to it.</p>