WILLIAMS v. KAWANAMI.
RICHFIELD OIL CO. v. KAWANAMI.
The appellant has filed a petition for a rehearing. With one exception, nothing is presented other than questions of fact. It is asserted, however, that the opinion contains an untrue statement in that it is there said that “the evidence is conflicting with respect to whether respondent sounded his horn.” As pointed out, the respondent testified to the effect that he did not think he had blown his horn. But counsel has overlooked the fact that the witness Collett, who was riding with respondent at the time, testified at least four times that the respondent did sound his horn, which supports the statement made.
The petition for a rehearing is denied.