Case Analysis. Analyze the cases and answer the given questions

1.PICART vs. SMITH, JR. [G.R. No. L-12219; March 15, 1918] FACTS:

On the Carlatan Bridge in La Union, Picart was riding on his pony over said bridge. Before he had gotten half way across, Smith approached from the opposite direction in an automobile. As the defendant neared the bridge he saw a horseman on it and blew his horn to give warning of his approach. He continued his course and after he had taken the bridge he gave two (2) more successive blasts, as it appeared to him that the man on horseback before him was not observing the rule of the road.

Picart saw the automobile coming and heard the warning signals. However, being perturbed by the novelty of the apparition or the rapidity of the approach, he pulled the pony closely up against the railing on the right side of the bridge instead of going to the left. He says that the reason he did this was that he thought he did not have sufficient time to get over to the other side. As the automobile approached, Smith guided it toward his left, that being the proper side of the road for the machine. In so doing, the defendant assumed that the horseman would move to the other side. Seeing that the pony was apparently quiet, the defendant, instead of veering to the right while yet some distance away or slowing down, continued to approach directly toward the horse without diminution of speed. When he had gotten quite near, there being then no possibility of the horse getting across to the other side, the defendant quickly turned his car sufficiently to the right to escape hitting the horse; but in so doing the automobile passed in such close proximity to the animal that it became frightened and turned its body across the bridge, got hit by the car and the limb was broken. The horse fell and its rider was thrown off with some violence. As a result of its injuries, the horse died. The plaintiff received contusions which caused temporary unconsciousness and required medical attention for several days.

From a judgment of the lower court of La Union absolving Smith from liability, Picart has appealed.

QUESTION:

Is Smith guilty of negligence? Is the lower court right in absolving Smith from liability? Explain the answer.