Hill v. Maxwell
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1DissentJohn A. Fogleman, Justice
I agree that, when the evidence is considered in the light most favorable to appellant and every reasonable inference is resolved in his favor, there was a question of fact as to the alleged negligence of appellees. Still I think the trial judge properly directed a verdict.
In considering this matter, we must keep in mind that pedestrians as well as motorists are entitled to use the public highways and each must act with regard to the presence of the other. Yocum v. Holmes, 222 Ark. 251, 258 S. W. 2d 535; Haralson v. Jones Truck Line, 223 Ark. 813, 270 S. W. 2d 892.
There are facts not stated…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Glidewell, Admin. v. Arkhola Sand Gravel Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1948
- Haralson v. Jones Truck LinesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1954
- Turner v. Hot Springs Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1934
- Missouri Pac. Rd. Co. v. Ross, Admr.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1937
- Yocum v. HolmesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1953
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.