Croxall v. Broadway Department Store, Inc.

THOMPSON (IRA F.), J.

On August 12, 1927, at about 6 o’clock in the evening the plaintiff alighted from an eastbound street-car on the west side of Seventh and Spring Streets, in Los Angeles. At the time she started to alight she saw a truck just east of Broadway. She stepped off the car into a safety zone' plainly marked with paint and large metal traffic buttons, which zone was 6 feet wide and 102 feet long, extending westerly along the street-car track from just west of the pedestrian crosswalk connecting the west sidewalk of Spring Street. From the safety zone to the sidewalk it was 15 feet, 8 inches. As the plaintiff started for the sidewalk she glanced over her shoulder and saw the truck at about the alley between the two thoroughfares or about 100 feet away. As she testified “she thought” she “had plenty of time to make the curb in safety”. However, the truck, which was traveling about 30 miles an hour in the opinion of a witness just before the brakes were applied, and which after they were applied left skid marks about '25 or 35 feet- long and brushed the loose material away for another 4 or 5 feet, was unable to stop, but ran into-and injured her. The corner is one of the busy corners in Los Angeles, particularly at 6 o’clock

[155]

in the evening and the traffic is controlled by signals. When the truck was about opposite the westerly end nf the safety zone the east and west signals changed from “Go” to “Stop”. This is an appeal from the judgment entered upon the verdict of the jury in favor of the plaintiff.

The sole question presented is indicated by the affirmation of the appellant that “Plaintiff was guilty of negligence directly contributing to her injury.” The argument indulged in support of this position is founded upon the twofold contention that respondent was not only violating an ordinance as she crossed from the safety zone to the curb, but also neglectful of her own safety in attempting to pass in front of the approaching truck. The ordinance referred to is contained in section 4 of article II and section 10 of article III of the traffic ordinance of Los Angeles. They read as follows:

“Article II, Sec. 4. Obedience to Traffic Signs: It shall be unlawful for any person to disobey the instruction of any mechanical traffic signal, lettered traffic sign, or paint marks placed upon the surface of the roadway in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance, or any barrier or sign' erected by any of the public departments or public utilities of the City of Los Angeles, provided the form of such barrier has been approved by the Board of Police Commissioners. ’ ’