McLeod v. Kjos

• Decision Date: 07 February 1929
• Docket Number: 21493.
• Citation: 274 P. 180,150 Wash. 637
• Parties: McLEOD v. KJOS et ux.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

274 P. 180

150 Wash. 637

McLEOD v. KJOS et ux.

No. 21493.

Supreme Court of Washington

February 7, 1929

Department 2.

Appeal from Superior Court, King County; Austin E. Griffiths, Judge.

Action by Laura McLeod against O. A. Kjos and wife. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Reversed, with instructions.

Poe Falknor, Falknor & Emory and Bausman, Oldham & Eggerman, all of Seattle, for appellants.

J Speed Smith and Henry Elliott, Jr., both of Seattle, for respondent.

FRENCH J.

Queen Anne avenue, the street on which the accident happened giving rise to this litigation, runs north and south in the city of Seattle, and is about 45 feet wide at the place in question. There are double street car tracks on this street, both of which are to the west of the center of the street. On the day of the accident appellant was driving south on Queen Anne avenue, proceeding slowly, and when about the distance of a city block from the scene of the accident a street car passed him, swinging over to the right-hand track so that there was only two or three feet between the street car and the curb. Appellant changed his course somewhat, going to the center of the street, and proceeded to drive south, being approximately at the center of the street; the left wheels of his car being from two to three feet to the left of the geographical center, and his right wheels being somewhat to the right of the exact street center, the car being about equally distant from the right and left curbs. The street car slowed down to take passengers, and appellant's car, moving at a speed variously estimated at from as low as eight miles an hour by some witnesses to as high as twenty miles an hour by others, followed behind and slightly to the left of the street car. Respondent left the entrance way of an apartment house located on the east side of Queen Anne avenue, hurrying to catch the street car in question. This entrance was located approximately 90 feet north of the street intersection. There is practically no grade at this point, it was broad daylight, and there was no immediate traffic excepting the street car and appellant's automobile, both of which were proceeding south. Respondent hurriedly crossed the parking strip into the street going in a westerly direction intending to pass to the rear of the street car and board it at the front entrance. Near the center of the street she collided with the left rear fender of appellant's car, was seriously injured, and allowed recovery by the court and jury, and this appeal follows.

There are many assignments of error covering generally the question of there being no evidence of negligence on the part of appellant. Also the question of the correctness of the instructions given and refused by the court. These we...