Kasper v. Carlson

The majority opinion determines that the judgment should be reversed because the trial court failed to give a requested instruction that the defendant Carlson was negligent as a matter of law. That finding appears to be based upon the defendant’s failure to see the Kasper automobile approaching from the north and the statement that the patrolman and Beyer testified the defendant made following the accident.

As we stated today in Jones v. Goeden, post p. 177, 180, 440 N.W.2d 199, 202 (1989), “Generally, the failure to see an approaching vehicle is not negligence as a matter of law unless the…