Cited by

See, Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , .” We next come to the claim of the plaintiff that the instructions were erroneous and prejudicial.

See, Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , .

Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , 246 N.W.

See, Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179, 181 , .

Kordiak v. Holmgren, 225 Minn. 134 , 30 N. W. *331 (2d) 16; Shockman v. Union Transfer Co. 220 Minn. 334 , 19 N. W. (2d) 812 ; Wilson v. Davidson, 219 Minn. 42 , 17 N. W. (2d) 31 ; Thorstad v. Doyle, 199 Minn. 543 , ; Christensen v. Pestorious, 189 Minn. 548 , ; Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , .

Nothing could be gained by a lengthy discussion of the authorities or by attempting to set out all the facts and circumstances shown by the evidence in the case.” Among many other cases involving accidents at intersections of streets and highways, the following are deemed helpful: Bell v. Pickett, 178 Minn. 540 , ; Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , ; Jeddeloh v. Hockenhull, 219 Minn. 541 , 18 N. W. (2d) 582 .

We think this case is controlled, however, by Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179, 181 , , where we said: “* * * We cannot see what they [passengers] could have done by way of protest or otherwise in regard to the passage of the stop sign or the entry into the intersection which would have changed the conduct of the driver or have prevented the accident.” *53 That language fits t

Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , , and Johnston v. Selfe, 190 Minn. 269 , , also cited by defendants, do not involve a directed verdict against a plaintiff upon the sole ground of contributory negligence.

In State v. Jeffrey, supra,, this court said [ 188 Minn. 179 ]: “The statute imposes a natural and moral duty — a threefold duty: “(1) The father’s duty to the mother, to whom he owes more than gratitude, since by his conduct he has in a measure contributed to her social ostracism and the impairment of her earning power; “(2) The father’s duty to his own child; and “(3) The fat

In Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , ; Duffey v. Curtis, 193 Minn. 358 , ; and Timmerman v. March, 199 Minn. 376 , , we held that the driver of an automobile has a right to assume that other automobile drivers will obey the latv.

Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , ; 5 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.

Co. 173 Minn. 237 , ; Wicker v. North States Const. Co. Inc. 183 Minn. 79 , ; Engholm v. Northland Transportation Co. 184 Minn. 349 , ; Hall v. Gillis, 188 Minn. 20 , ; Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , ; Findley v. Brittenham, 199 Minn. 197 , .

Under the circumstances, we think the cases cited by the trial court sustain the view by it taken: Fitzgerald v. Village of Bovey, 174 Minn. 450 , ; Wicker v. North States Const. Co. Inc. 183 Minn. 79 , ; Engholm v. Northland Transportation Co. 184 Minn. 349 , ; Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , .

Paul, 187 Minn. 320 , , 86 A. L. R. 198; Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , .

466 , and Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , 246 N.W.

Jacobsen v. Ahasay, 188 Minn. 179 , .