Does the doctrine of ordinary care need to be considered by the court or jury?

California, United States of America


The following excerpt is from Teilhet v. Santa Clara County, 149 Cal.App.2d 305, 308 P.2d 356 (Cal. App. 1957):

In Bixby v. Pickwick Stage Co., 131 Cal.App. 739, at page 741, 21 P.2d 972, one of the cases cited with approval in the Peri case, [149 Cal.App.2d 311] the court said: 'It is almost uniformly the rule that whether the conduct of a person in driving into smoke, fog, dust, or mist offends the doctrine of ordinary care is ordinarily a question to be determined by the court or jury.' The question of respondent's contributory negligence was properly left to the jury. Appellant was not entitled to its proposed instruction that if plaintiff had knowledge of the condition of the road the jury should return a verdict for the county.

Other Questions


Does a jury have to consider whether a jury has been instructed to disregard an instruction from the Court of Appeal that is not supported by how the jury views the evidence? (California, United States of America)
Does a trial court's statement that it does not believe the jury is hopelessly deadlocked give the jury the impression the jury should convict defendant? (California, United States of America)
Does the trial court's instructions to the jury that the jury must conclusively accept the previous jury's finding that defendant's guilt has already been decided? (California, United States of America)
Does the court have to add an instruction to the jury that, in the event the jury found defendant guilty of the lesser included charge of involuntary manslaughter, it should also consider whether he personally used an assault weapon or firearm? (California, United States of America)
When a jury asks a jury a question after retiring for deliberation, does the court have a duty to provide the jury with additional instructions? (California, United States of America)
When a defendant's out-of-court statement is admitted to a jury, does the court have to instruct the jury that this evidence must be viewed with caution? (California, United States of America)
Is it sufficient for the jury to consider the error in finding that the jury considered evidence from which it could have come to a verdict without reliance on reliance on the error? (California, United States of America)
Is a defendant's right to a fair and impartial jury affected by the recent Court of Appeal's ruling that a jury should not be asked to consider arson and burn injuries? (California, United States of America)
When a jury has been sworn in, can the trial court reopen jury selection after the jury has already been sworn? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court of Appeal have the power to overturn a conviction for sexual assault on the grounds that the trial court improperly instructed the jury to consider the issue of venue? (California, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.