Child v. Hill

This is the second appeal in this controversy. See Child v. Sill, 149 Wash. 468, 271 Pac. 266.

■ The author of this did not concur in that opinion and still would be sympathetically inclinéd toward a recovery on this appeal were it not that the principal questions of law arising from the facts were there decided. Both records have been carefully examined.

The case was retried on the same pleadings as before. The negligence charged by appellant was that respondent failed to give any signal or warning of his approach, and drove in a careless manner without regard to the rights and safety of…