McCanna v. Silke

Citations

• 75 Wash. 383
• 134 P. 1063
• 1913 Wash. LEXIS 1724

Syllabus

<p>Highways — Negligent Use — Automobile Collision — Ownership or Control of Machine — Evidence—Sufficiency. In an action for personal injuries sustained by a traveler on the highway by being run into by an automobile, a nonsuit is properly entered as to a defendant who was merely shown to be riding in the automobile at the time of the accident, since his relation to the driver or owner of the automobile and consequent responsibility for its operation and control cannot be left to speculation and conjecture; and the fact that he assisted in caring for the injured party by driving the automobile is insufficient to make a prima facie case of liability against him.</p> <p>New Trial — Newly Discovered Evidence — Diligence. A new-trial for newly discovered evidence in an admission by defendant, after the trial, of a fact that would have fixed his liability, should not have been granted when the fact might have been easily elicited by the submission of interrogatories before the trial or by his examination under oath at the trial; since it could have been discovered with ordinary diligence.</p>