Adamson v. Traylor

Decided August 9, 1962

Washington Supreme Court · decided 1962-08-09

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“You are further instructed that under the circumstances that the negligence of the father, if you so find, will not absolve the defendant from liability of any acts of negligence of the defendant.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 69 Wash. 2d 306 - Vioen v. Cluff

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1962-08-09

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently December 1980

9 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Hill, J.

¶1(dissenting) — I dissent. I cannot agree that any juror would, or could, have failed to understand that the negligence of the father was not an issue in this case, after the trial court had instructed the jurors:

“ . . . that the negligence, if any, of the father cannot be imputed to the minor plaintiff in this case.

“You are further instructed that under the circumstances that the negligence of the father, if you so find, will not absolve the defendant from liability of any acts of negligence of the defendant.”

¶2The case was presented to the jury on proper instructions on the issue of whether the defendant driver’s negligence was the cause of the original trauma, and I would affirm the judgment of dismissal based on the verdict of the jury.

¶3Weaver and Ott, JJ., concur with Hill, J.

¶4October 26, 1962. Petition for rehearing denied.