OCR Text |
Show uu REAR DRIVERS MUSE ACCIDENTS Judge of Colorado Court Makes Decision in This Regard The supreme court of the stele of Colorado Colo-rado has einpliuth'ully expressed Ks disapproval dis-approval of the efforts of persons tiding tid-ing In tli rt-ar ht-Ht of an ftUtOjnobltl to control or Interfere with the operations of the driver. In ihe case of Hedges vs. Mit. to ll, re- I nontly decided by tho supreme court, in an opinion written b Juduc Uurke. attention at-tention Is called to the fact ihut the rt-ar seal driver l responsible for enough ar- i nlents hs llm ucore stand-,, without th" aid of '.bid klu I precedent II vmus i-on-lendutl In that case by the attoi who appealed to Ihe Kupreme court that a duly devolved upon 'he passengers In the tear mat to warn und guide the driver as to his loute of travel, his speed, etc., and that negleet to discharge dis-charge that duty constituted contributory negligence so as to prevent repovi o! damitKOM according to Attorney On M. Qarwood. who was Interested In (hs I case. Judge Burke uses Ihe following lan-gusiie: lan-gusiie: "The duty to clve such advice impllci a duty to heed it, and (he rearseal driver Is responsible for enough accidents acci-dents ou the score stands without the aid of judicial precedent. Thr plu the passenger who knows better than lh driver of the car when wbera and how il should bo opei ale. I i u ,mh el." The court alto takes judicial knowledge knowl-edge of the condition under which an aulonobils is operatsd and dlaappn of (lie contention that a passenger can be charged with negligence In permitting his feet or legs to bocoms entangled In the foot rail of an automobile In the iieiiges-Miti hell '-use the court oonflrmi Its former rulings to the effect (bar violation vio-lation of a Iralflc ordlnan' . constituti negligence per he. that Is. whenever one la injured (biouKb thr ni jrllgejice of the operator of an automobile and l he accident is brought about bv the violation viola-tion tf soma truffle regulation, the dt -fendant Is gujtt "f negliRrnce. antl Ihe plaintiff nttttrt prova nothing beyond the accident and the Injuries in order to Otitis him to recover damage ' |