EDLUND v. RUHMLAND (1935)

District Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 2, California.

EDLUND et ux. v. RUHMLAND et al.

Civ. 9420.

Decided: March 26, 1935

John C. Miles and John L. Fleming, both of Los Angeles, for appellants. Vernon M. Brydolf, of Pasadena, for respondents.

Appeal from judgment for defendants in an action for personal injuries to appellant Hulda Edlund, who was struck by the automobile of respondent Jack Ruhmland while attempting to cross the street to go to her home.

While there was evidence which, if uncontradicted, would establish plaintiffs' cause of action, there was ample evidence that the collision was not proximately caused by any negligence on the part of the driver of the automobile, and that the plaintiff Mrs. Edlund was herself guilty of negligence directly the cause of her being struck and injured. The question here is, therefore, not one of law but one of fact, upon which the determination of the trial court is conclusive.

The judgment is affirmed.

FRICKE, Justice pro tem.

We concur: STEPHENS, P. J.; CRAIL. J.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network