Henthorne v. Hopwood

O’CONNELL, J.,

specially concurring.

Today we hold that because the plaintiff crossed the street in violation of a traffic ordinance prohibiting jaywalking he is contributorily negligent as a matter of law and therefore he is not entitled to have the jury consider his claim.

A few days ago in Barnes v. Winkler, 216 Or 130, 337 P2d 816, we held that a plaintiff who crossed a street in a similar manner was entitled to the jury’s deliberation on his claim where no ordinance prohibited jaywalking.

The difference in the result in the two cases rests entirely upon the happenstance that although in both…