Herron v. Rose City Transit Co.

431 P.2d 831, 247 Or. 616, 1967 Ore. LEXIS 529
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Herron v. Rose City Transit Co.. Read the opinion of the Court — 243 Or. 64
Oregon Supreme Court·Decided September 20, 1967·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff brought an action for damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by defendant’s negligence. She slipped and fell on a snow-covered, rutted and icy street while walking from the curb to board defendant’s bus. A more complete statement of the facts can be found in the opinion of this court on a previous appeal. See Herron v. Rose City Transit Co., 243 Or 64, 411 P2d 445 (1966). Plaintiff here appeals from an adverse judgment entered upon a jury verdict.

Plaintiff contends the court erred in submitting to the jury the issue of plaintiff’s contributory negligence because there was no evidence of such negligence. Plaintiff was charged with failure to keep a proper lookout for her own safety. There was testimony that the plaintiff had just come from the doctor where her eyes had been dilated. She testified she did not see the place on the ice and snow upon which she fell. Prom this testimony the jury could have drawn the inference that she did not keep a proper lookout for her own safety.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Herron v. Rose City Transit Co., 431 P.2d 831, 247 Or. 616, 1967 Ore. LEXIS 529 (Or. 1967).

431 P.2d 831 (Herron v. Rose City Transit Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Herron v. Rose City Transit Co.
411 P.2d 445 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1966)