Legal Opinion

Wilfong v. Batdorf

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided August 3, 1983No. Nos. 82-944 and 82-1091PublishedCited by 70 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtClifford F. Brown, J.

These cases can be divided into two distinct issues. The first is whether the failure to give an audible signal by plaintiff-appellant Cindy Wilfong before attempting a passing maneuver was negligence per se and the proximate cause of the ensuing accident. The second, an issue common to both cases, is whether the doctrine of comparative negligence should have been applied as the standard by which to judge the conduct of the plaintiff and plaintiffs decedent.

I

After argument by defendant Batdorf s counsel, concerning the failure of plaintiff Wilfong to give an audible signal before attempting…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Kilbreath v. RudyOhio Supreme Court · 1968
  2. Smith v. New York Central Rd.Ohio Supreme Court · 1930
  3. State, Ex Rel. v. Indus. Comm.Ohio Supreme Court · 1937
  4. Denicola v. Providence HospitalOhio Supreme Court · 1979
  5. State ex rel. Holdridge v. Industrial CommissionOhio Supreme Court · 1967

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by70 opinions

  1. Van Fossen v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Huffman v. Hair Surgeon, Inc.Ohio Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Jones v. VIP Development Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1984
  4. Shinaver v. SzymanskiOhio Supreme Court · 1984
  5. Vogel v. WellsOhio Supreme Court · 1991

65 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API