Smith v. Rodene
| Decision Date | 06 February 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 38119,38119 |
| Citation | 423 P.2d 934 |
| Court | Washington Supreme Court |
| Parties | Arnold J. McLean SMITH et al., Respondents, v. John Doe RODENE et al., Appellants. |
It is hereby ordered, in the above cause, that the opinion as it appears at 69 Wash.Dec.2d 484, 418 P.2d 741 be changed as follows.
The two sentences beginning in the 15th line from the top of page 487, 418 P.2d page 743, which read:
The liability of each defendant being several and not joint, the burden is on the plaintiff to prove with reasonable certainty the amount of damages attributable to each collision. In Maas v. Perkins, 42 Wash.2d 38, 43, 253 P.2d 427 (1953), the plaintiff was the owner of certain real property upon which had accumulated a quantity of oil, sludge and waste.
are deleted, and the following sentences inserted in lieu thereof:
The liability of each defendant being several, and not joint, the burden is on the plaintiff, as in any other case, to prove the amount of damages attributable to each collision. We cite Maas v. Perkins, 42 Wash.2d 38, 43, 253 P.2d 427 (1953), as bearing upon the necessity of the plaintiff establishing liability of each of the several defendants. The plaintiff was the owner of certain real property upon which had accumulated a quantity of oil, sludge and waste.
In the 21st line from the top of page 488, 418 P.2d page 744, the following words are inserted following the words 'No. 4 and No. 7':
which we now hold to be correct.
so that the sentence beginning in the 19th line from the top of page 488, 418 P.2d page 744 reads:
Instruction No. 10, which we have held erroneous, is patently inconsistent with and contradictory to instructions No. 4 and No. 7 which we now hold to be correct.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kloepfel v. Bokor
...than to those who are merely negligent. Id. Washington is no exception to this rule. In Smith v. Rodene, 69 Wash.2d 482, 418 P.2d 741, 423 P.2d 934 (1966), this court "We think that a fair summary of the holdings in such cases is as follows: (1) Where plaintiff suffers mental or emotional d......
-
Armijo v. Yakima Hma, LLC
...related to the difference in fault. * * * Washington is no exception to this rule. In Smith v. Rodene, 69 Wash.2d 482, 418 P.2d 741, 423 P.2d 934 (1966), this court stated: “We think that a fair summary of the holdings in such cases is as follows: (1) Where plaintiff suffers mental or emoti......
-
Mitchem v. Morgan, 93-2-01246-3
...v. Rainbow Ambulance Serv., Inc., 75 Wn.2d 494, 498, 452 P.2d 220 (1969); Smith v. Rodene, 69 Wn.2d 482, 418 P.2d 741 (1966), amended by 423 P.2d 934 (1967); Murgatroyd v. Dudley, 184 Wash. 222, 50 P.2d 1025 (1935).[70] Dr. Morgan's reliance upon RCW 4.22.070(1) is likewise misplaced. That ......
-
Vega v. United States
...the mental fright also threatens immediate bodily harm. Smith v. Rodene, 69 Wash. 2d 482, 489, 418 P.2d 741, 746 (1966) amended, 423 P.2d 934 (Wash. 1967) (internal citations omitted). On the other hand, if mental suffering or emotional distress is caused by a willful act, recovery is permi......
-
§20.6 Analysis
...militates for joinder of all defendants who are proper parties under CR 20. Smith v. Rodene, 69 Wn.2d 482, 418 P.2d 741 (1966), amended, 423 P.2d 934 (1967). Plaintiff sued for injuries incurred when defendants' vehicle struck plaintiff's vehicle and for injuries incurred when codefendants'......