Skip to main content
· 3/28/1911

Domke v. Gunning

Citations

  • 62 Wash. 629
  • 114 P. 436
  • 1911 Wash. LEXIS 758

Syllabus

<p>Municipal Corporations — Use oe Streets — -Automobiles—Instructions — Care Required. It is not prejudicial error to instruct that the owner of an automobile must exercise “exceeding” care upon the busy streets of a city, where in other instructions the jury were told that he must exercise reasonable care to Avoid injuring any one, and would be liable if he failed to exercise such care as an ordinary prudent person would exercise under like circumstances.</p> <p>Same — Comment on Pacts. In instructions as to the care required of the driver of an automobile, a phrase “moving quietly as it does,” it not an unlawful comment on the evidence, where it had reference to automobiles generally and not to the one in question.</p> <p>Same — Care Required. An instruction as to the care required of the driver of an automobile in a busy city street properly requires Ijim to exercise such skill and care as to anticipate such collisions as the nature of the machine and the locality might suggest as liable to occur in the absence of such precautions.</p> <p>Same — Regulations—Ordinances—“Curb”—Barricades. Under a city ordinance requiring drivers of automobiles upon turning corners to leave a space of six feet between the curb and the automobile, a fence or barricade in the street in front of a building that was being erected is properly taken as the “curb,” where pedestrians were required to leave thé walk and step into the street outside the fence or barricade.</p> <p>Appeal and Error — Preservation oe Grounds — Instructions— Objections — -Amendment. It is unavailing to object that an instruction as to negligence of the driver of an automobile in any of the respects provided in the city ordinances “or otherwise” is outside the allegations of the complaint, in view of the rule that the complaint may be deemed amended; there being no objection that it goes beyond the evidence.</p> <p>Municipal Corporations — Use oe Streets — Automobiles — Contributory Negligence — Instructions. An

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • finding that “the trial court’s failure to articulate specific findings in its ruling on the State’s race-neutral reasons is not reversible error”
  • The jury found that victim actually was killed

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fullerton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.