Redford v. Spokane Street Railway Co.

Citations

• 15 Wash. 419
• 46 P. 650
• 1896 Wash. LEXIS 209

Syllabus

<p>JURORS — QUALIFICATIONS — CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — UNIFORM LAWS — NEGLIGENCE — PROXIMATE CAUSE — CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE — STENOGRAPHER’S NOTES AS EVIDENCE.</p> <p>The act of March 19,1895 (Laws 1895, p. 139), requiring persons impaneled as jurors to be householders, but making no such requirement of those summoned upon an open venire to complete the panel, is not unconstitutional as a violation óf art. 1, § 12, of the constitution, -which provides that “no law shall he passed granting to any citizen, class of citizens . . . privileges or immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens.”</p> <p>Where a law is uniform in its operations, in so far as it operates at all, its constitutionality is not affected by the number of persons within the scope of its operation.</p> <p>The fact that a person in a vehicle, after having driven across a street railway track, stops his vehicle so close to the track, for the purpose of conversing with a friend, that a car cannot pass without colliding, does not necessarily constitute contributory negligence of such a character as to prevent recovery for the negligence of the railway company in causing a collision.</p> <p>When the defendant’s negligence is the proximate cause of the injury, while that of the plaintiff is only a remote cause or a mere condition of it, the action will lie.</p> <p>A transcript of the stenographer’s notes showing the testimony of a witness on a former trial, is not competent evidence for impeaching the witness’s testimony in a subsequent trial of the same cause.</p>