"If we assume for the moment that an operator of a vehicle obtains the right of way by giving the signal for a left-hand turn without complying with the other mandatory provisions of the statute, which I have italicized, it must certainly appear that a proper signal was not given, for the reason that the evidence concerning the admission made by respondent does not indicate that holding out his hand proved that he held it out in a horizontal manner; in other words, there is no evidence, direct or circumstantial, that the boy gave the proper signal.
[...]
"The evidence quoted by the majority does not indicate that the rider of the bicycle complied with either rule, that relating to overtaking vehicles or that relating to left-hand turns at intersections. If it be admitted that the boy gave a signal, indicating a turn to the left, he would not have been justified in making the turn until he had complied with the provisions of sec. 6360-85. The signal to turn, if given by the boy, was not timely because he had not complied with the provisions of the statute."
Disclaimer