Marton v. Pickrell

Citations

• 112 Wash. 117
• 191 P. 1101
• 17 A.L.R. 68
• 1920 Wash. LEXIS 733

Syllabus

<p>Highways (53)—Law of the Road—Application. The statutes requiring travelers to keep to the right upon a public highway have reference to vehicles, and do not refer, in express terms or by necessary implication, to pedestrians; nor do they require the user to keep to the right in traveling, but cover only the meeting and passing of traffic.</p> <p>Highways (53, 58)—Collision—Injuey to Pedestrian—Negligence—Contributory Negligence—Question for Jury. Whether defendant used necessary care to avoid an accident and whether plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, are questions for the jury, where plaintiff, walking upon the left-hand side of a paved highway after dark, stepped toward the center of the road upon seeing defendant’s car approaching, and continued to do so upon seeing that the car also turned toward the center of the road, and he was struck when he had reached a point midway between the center and the right-hand edge of the pavement.</p> <p>Appeal (433)—Review—Harmless Error—Favorable to Appellant. Appellant cannot complain of a conflict between an instruction applying the rule of the road to a pedestrian on the left side of the road and one placing upon him the burden of proving the contributory negligence of the pedestrian, since the first instruction was erroneous and favorable to appellant.</p> <p>Appeal (460)—Review—Harmless Error—Instructions—Prejudicial Effect. Error cannot be predicated upon instructions relating to the evidence of plaintiff’s admission of fault and contributory negligence and as to plaintiff’s knowledge of the law, where the evidence at most amounted to a conclusion and not a fact, and the jury could not have been misled by the reference to his knowledge of the law.</p>