Clifton v. Crider

I respectfully dissent, because I believe the plaintiff made a submissible humanitarian case on the “submitted issue of failure to slacken speed.” My conclusion is consistent with that of Pritchard, C., who prepared a memorandum of dissent prior to his becoming a Judge of the Court of Appeals, and I set out his reasoning as expressed therein:

“The emphasis placed upon the testimony of defendant Crider as to what he saw and did is not in accordance with the well-established rules of setting forth and considering the evidence in the light most favorable to plaintiff, who here has the verdict.…