Legal Opinion
City of Tucson v. Holliday
Court of Appeals of Arizona
Decided February 17, 1966No. 2 CA-CIV 88PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MOLLOY, Judge.
This is a personal injury action brought by a lady who fell in downtown Tucson while crossing at the intersection of Stone and Pennington in a diagonal fashion. The fact situation insofar as the pedestrian crossing is concerned is not unlike that in the case of Vegodsky v. City of Tucson, 1 Ariz.App. 102, 399 P.2d 723 (1965). The intersection is one controlled by lights which, in one phase, flash the word “Walk.” During this phase, pedestrians customarily “scramble” through the center of the intersection, many of them crossing diagonally, as did the plaintiff.
At the time of this…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Halepeska v. Callihan Interests, Inc.Texas Supreme Court · 1963
- Felgner v. AndersonMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
- Meistrich v. Casino Arena Attractions, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1959
- McConville v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1962
- Reed v. Real Detective Publishing Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1945
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- South v. National Railroad Passenger Corp.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1980
- Nichols v. BakerArizona Supreme Court · 1966
- City of Tucson v. WondergemArizona Supreme Court · 1970
- Patania v. SilverstoneCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966
- O'Rielly Motor Company v. RichCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.