Zeni
v.
Supreme
Court of
397
Prosser,
pp. 220-223
Facts: The plaintiff was walking
in a roadway facing away from traffic on a snowy day when the sidewalk was
impassible. The defendant hit her. The plaintiff sued, but the defendant claimed
that the plaintiff’s conduct constituted contributory negligence because it was
a violation of statute to fail to use the sidewalk or to walk in the street
facing towards traffic. The jury found
for the plaintiff but the verdict was reversed on appeal. The plaintiff appealed in turn.
Issue: Was the jury right in
finding the plaintiff negligent?
Rule: Out of three possible rules,
this court chooses the following: Violation of an applicable statute only makes
a prima facie case for negligence that may be rebutted if it can be shown that
the violation is excusable.
Analysis: The court finds that the
statute that is relevant to the current case gives the jury a clear guideline
for determining whether the plaintiff was negligent and whether such negligence
contributed to the plaintiff’s injury.
The court concludes that the jury was correctly and adequately
instructed.
Conclusion: The court reverses the
decision of the appellate court and affirms the jury verdict.