Bodaken v. Logan, 50697

• Decision Date: 16 October 1962
• Docket Number: No. 50697,50697
• Citation: 117 N.W.2d 470,254 Iowa 230
• Parties: Diane BODAKEN, a Minor, by George Bodaken, Her Father and Next Friend, Appellee, v. Garth E. LOGAN and Carla M. Steffen Logan, Appellants.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

Page 470

117 N.W.2d 470

254 Iowa 230

Diane BODAKEN, a Minor, by George Bodaken, Her Father and Next Friend, Appellee, v. Garth E. LOGAN and Carla M. Steffen Logan, Appellants.

No. 50697.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 16, 1962.

Mack, Mack & Hansen, Storm Lake, for appellants.

Pendleton & Pendleton, Storm Lake, for appellee.

MOORE, Justice.

There is but one question for us to determine--whether the evidence created a jury question on plaintiff's contention she was a passenger and not a guest when injured while riding in the car owned by defendant Garth E. Logan, driven with his consent by defendant Carla M. Steffen Logan.

The trial court overruled defendants' motions for directed verdict made at the close of plaintiff's evidence and renewed at the close of all the evidence. The case was submitted to the jury on the necessary elements of a negligence case, including carefully prepared instructions on the passenger or guest issue. After overruling defendants' motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, judgment was entered against defendants on the $4000 jury verdict in favor of plaintiff. Defendants have appealed.

Defendants contend section 321.494, Iowa Code, I.C.A. is applicable and bars any recovery by plaintiff. It provides:

'Guest statute. The owner or operator of a motor vehicle shall not be liable for any damages to any passenger or person riding in said motor vehicle as a guest or by invitation and not for hire unless damage is caused as a result of the driver of said motor vehicle being under the influence of intoxicating liquor or because of the reckless operation by him of such motor vehicle.'

In considering the propriety of a directed verdict for defendants the court gives plaintiff's evidence the most favorable construction it will reasonably bear. Rule 344(f) 2, Rules of Civil Procedure, 58 I.C.A., adopted September 17, 1962.

Applying this rule, the evidence is that about one week prior to June 6, 1960, Carla Steffen Logan (unmarried at the time) and plaitniff were with a group of girls. Carla stated to plaintiff she could get her boy friend's car and wanted to go to Sioux City to pick out some uniforms. Plaintiff did not recall her answer, if any. On June 6 Carla came to plaintiff's place of employment, in Storm Lake, and said she had her boy friend's car and would like plaintiff to go with her to Sioux City to help her pick out uniforms. Plaintiff did not give Carla a definite answer but said she would discuss it with her employer. Plaintiff called Carla later, got off work early, went home for a quick change and the two girls started for Sioux City. The accident occurred before they reached there. Plaintiff had not asked to be taken to Sioux City and had no intentions of looking for anything. She had no money. Plaintiff was not going on as pleasure trip. Carla planned to attend Northwest Medical School of Technology and understood it would require special uniforms. Plaintiff had no special training as to types of uniforms but did know the type worn in medical technology school.

Carla and plaintiff attended the same high school, were friends, but did not run around together. After high school Carla went away to school. Plaintiff remained in Storm Lake. In May or earlier Carla returned. Prior to June 6 the girls were together two or three times but on no shopping trips. One evening they went to Spencer--just riding around.

The general principles usually applied in defining a guest under the various guest statutes are thus stated in 4 Blashfield, Cyclopedia of Automobile Law and Practice, Perm.Ed., section 2292, to-wit:

'In determining who are 'guests' within the meaning of automobile guest statutes, the enacments should not be extended beyond the correction of the evils which induced their enactment.

'They were designed to relieve the harshness of the common-law rule which requires the exercise of ordinary care even to a recipient of the driver's kindness and hospitality. In construing such statutes their terms are not always to be taken in their literal sense, and the court will consider not only the ordinarily accepted meaning of the words used, but also such interpretation as may have been applied to them under common law or similar statutes. * * *

'One important element in determining whether a person is a guest within the meaning and limitations of such statutes is the identity of the person or persons advantaged by the carriage. If, in its direct operation, it confers a benefit only on the person to whom the ride is given, and no benefits, other than such as are incidental to hospitality, companionship, or the like, upon the person extending the invitation, the passenger is a guest within the statutes; but, if his carriage tends to the promotion of mutual interests of both himself and the driver and operates for their common benefit or if it is primarily for the attainment of some objective or purpose of the operator, he is not a guest within the meaning of such enactments.'

See also 5A Am.Jur., Automobiles and Highway Traffic, section 514, page 552; 60 C.J.S. Motor Vehicles § 399, page 1008.

We have recognized and applied these general principles. In Bookhart v. Greenlease-Lied Motor Co., 215 Iowa 8, 244 N.W. 721, 82 A.L.R. 1359, a prospective buyer of an automobile, who on invitation from a salesman entered the car to observe its performance, was held not to be a guest. In Thompson v. Farrand, 217 Iowa 160, 165, 251 N.W. 44, a lawyer's client who went with him on a trip to Ottumwa, stopping off at Pella to attend to some business, was held not to be a guest. In Knutson v. Lurie, 217 Iowa 192, 251 N.W. 147, we held it was a disputed question of fact for the jury to determine whether a domestic servant was riding in her employer's car as a guest or a servant. In Porter v. Decker, 222 Iowa 1109, 1111, 270 N.W. 897, we held it...