353 P.2d 564 (Or. 1960), Vaughn v. Bax

Citation353 P.2d 564, 222 Or. 575
Opinion JudgePER CURIAM.
Party NameSammy VAUGHN, by his guardian, James Vaughn, Respondent, v. Eugene BAX and Ann Palmer Bakeries, Inc., a corporation, Appellants.
AttorneyNorman L. Easley, Portland, argued the cause for appellants. On the brief were Seitz, Easley & Whipple, Portland. Roger Tilbury, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Alexander & Tilbury and J. Kelly Farris, Portland.
Case DateJune 29, 1960
CourtSupreme Court of Oregon

Page 564

353 P.2d 564 (Or. 1960)

222 Or. 575

Sammy VAUGHN, by his guardian, James Vaughn, Respondent,

v.

Eugene BAX and Ann Palmer Bakeries, Inc., a corporation, Appellants.

Supreme Court of Oregon, Department 2.

June 29, 1960

Argued and Submitted June 16, 1960.

Norman L. Easley, Portland, argued the cause for [222 Or. 576] appellants. On the brief were Seitz, Easley & Whipple, Portland.

Roger Tilbury, Portland, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Alexander & Tilbury and J. Kelly Farris, Portland.

Before McALLISTER, C. J., and PERRY, SLOAN, O'CONNELL and MILLARD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff, Sammy Vaughn, when he was struck by an automobile operated by the defendant Eugene Bax as an agent of the defendant Ann Palmer Bakeries, Inc. The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $9,000 and from the judgment entered thereon, the defendants appeal.

The accident occurred at the intersection of Williams avenue and Weidler street in Portland. Williams avenue runs north and south and Weidler street runs east and west. Plaintiff, a boy of 13, was walking to school in a northerly direction on the east side of Williams avenue and while crossing Weidler street in the crosswalk on the east side of the intersection was struck by defendant's car. Defendant Bax had been driving south on Williams avenue and was making a left turn to go east on Weidler street when his car struck plaintiff.

Defendants contend that the court erred in failing to withdraw from the jury the plaintiff's charges of excessive speed, lack of control and failure to stop, swerve or otherwise avoid colliding with plaintiff. Defendants also contend that the

Page 565

court erred in refusing to instruct the jury to disregard plaintiff's claim that he suffered lacerations and abrasions to [222 Or. 577] certain parts of his body, loss of sleep and permanent injury.

We have carefully reviewed the record and find no merit in any of the assignments of error.

The judgment is affirmed.

To continue reading

Request your trial
1 practice notes
  • 505 P.2d 939 (Or.App. 1973), Neuhaus v. Federico
    • United States
    • Oregon Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • 2 Febrero 1973
    ...the extent of a school board's authority to enact rules governing student conduct. See, e.g., Dilger v. School District 24CJ, 222 Or. 108, 353 P.2d 564 (1960); [12 Or.App. 319] Owens v. School District, 3 Or.App. 294, 473 P.2d 678 (1970). Thus, the question of the school board's authority i......
1 cases
  • 505 P.2d 939 (Or.App. 1973), Neuhaus v. Federico
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Oregon
    • 2 Febrero 1973
    ...the extent of a school board's authority to enact rules governing student conduct. See, e.g., Dilger v. School District 24CJ, 222 Or. 108, 353 P.2d 564 (1960); [12 Or.App. 319] Owens v. School District, 3 Or.App. 294, 473 P.2d 678 (1970). Thus, the question of the school board's authority i......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT