In Kastel v. Stieber (1932) 215 Cal. 37, the court rejected the notion that gross negligence, as that term was used in our automobile guest statute, in effect in October 1929 (Cal. Veh. Act, 141 3/4), meant some degree of wantonness or willfulness. Indicating its adherence to definition of gross negligence as "a want of slight diligence" (pp. 46-47) the court concluded that: "It must always be borne in mind that a state of facts relating to an automobile accident out on the open highway cannot be controlling as to the conclusions to be reached upon a corresponding state of facts occurring within city limits. The former might only reasonably be held negligence, while in the latter, owing to the difference in the hazardousness of the situation, gross negligence would only be the right conclusion."