In a motor vehicle accident case, can plaintiff argue that the instruction on contributory negligence should have been given?

Of more import is plaintiff's last contention that no instruction on contributory negligence should have been given as no evidence of any negligence on the part of plaintiff was shown which, combining with the negligence of the driver of the truck, contributed as a proximate cause in bringing about his injury. As the case of Robinson v. Cable, 55 Cal.2d 425, 427--428, 11 Cal.Rptr. 377, 378, 359 P.2d 929, 930, cited by plaintiff, states: 'In the absence of some fact brought to his attention which would cause a person of ordinary prudence to act otherwise, a person riding in an automobile is not charged with the responsibility of observing the condition of the traffic on the highway, and his mere failure to do so, without more, will not support a finding of contributory negligence.'