Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Evelyn Lundberg, Administratrix of the Estate of Stanley A. Lundberg, Deceased v. Rose Fuel & Materials, Inc.

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

Decided May 23, 1962No. 13521Published

1Concurrence

HASTINGS, Chief Judge.

I concur in the result reached in this case.

I do not agree that the trial court erred in refusing to give plaintiff’s tendered instructions Nos. 9 and 10. No. 9 merely is an abstract statement of the law that the operator of a motor vehicle upon a public highway is required to maintain a reasonable lookout for other traffic on the highway and that failure to do so would constitute negligence. No. 10 is a peremptory instruction based upon the same rule applied to this case.

The jury answered three special interrogatories favorably to defendant, as follows:

“Interrogatory…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Gamble v. LewisIndiana Supreme Court · 1949
  2. Duane F. Lee and Margaret Lee v. Terminal Transport Company, Duane F. Lee and Margaret Lee v. Terminal Transport CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1959
  3. Byron E. Martin v. United Moving and Storage Company and Lawrence PriceCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1959
  4. New York Central Railroad v. VerkinsIndiana Court of Appeals · 1954

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API