Bond v. Coats
| Decision Date | 19 February 1936 |
| Docket Number | 15,162 |
| Citation | 199 N.E. 874,101 Ind.App. 526 |
| Parties | BOND, ADMINISTRATOR v. COATS |
| Court | Indiana Appellate Court |
1. APPEAL---Briefs---Failure to Discuss Errors---Waiver.---Assigned errors not discussed in appellant's brief are waived. p. 528.
2. AUTOMOBILES---Action for Injuries---Instructions---Speed and Control---Regulatory Statute Declaratory of Common Law.---In action for damages in automobile collision based upon violation of the statute regulating speed and control of automobiles, the giving of instructions applicable to common law negligence, held not error since the statute is merely declaratory of the rules existing at common law. p. 529.
From Harrison Circuit Court; Thomas J. Wilson, Judge.
Action by Reuben Bond, administrator of the estate of Lucy Reed deceased, against Lawrence N. Coats for damages in automobile collision. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appealed.
Affirmed.
Funkhouser & Funkhouser, Frank Self and L. O. O'Bannon, for appellant.
Slaymaker Merrill & Locke and Hugh E. Reynolds, for appellee.
Appellant, as administrator of the estate of Lucy Reed, deceased, brought two separate actions against the appellee, one for the recovery of damages to decedent's automobile, and the other for damages sustained because of her death, both resulting from the same collision of the automobile of appellant's decedent, while being driven and operated by decedent, with a truck owned and operated by appellee on United States Highway No. 31, at a point about four miles south of Columbus, Indiana.
The issues in each of the causes of action consisted of an amended complaint in three paragraphs, each alleging the same facts except in the one case the facts alleging damages related to the automobile, which damages occurred without negligence of decedent, while in the other the facts alleged damages sustained by reason of her death caused by the wrongful acts of appellee.
The first paragraph of each complaint was predicated upon the theory of the violation of the provisions of sec. 47-514, Burns 1933, sec. 11167, Baldwin's Ind. St. 1934, in that when about to meet the automobile driven by appellant's decedent appellee negligently drove his motor truck to the left of the center line of said highway and into the path of decedent's automobile, thus causing the accident resulting in the injuries complained of.
The second paragraph of each complaint was predicated upon the theory of the violation of the provisions of sec. 47-516 Burns 1933, sec. 11169, Baldwin's Ind. St. 1934, in that the appellee negligently operated his motor truck upon a public highway by driving the same at a high and dangerous rate of speed and at a speed greater than was reasonable or prudent, having regard to the width of the highway, density of the traffic and at such a rate of speed as to endanger the life and property of appellant's decedent and other persons then using the highway, thus causing the accident resulting in the injuries complained of. The third paragraph of each complaint was predicated upon the theory of the violation of the provisions of sec. 47-515, Burns 1933, sec. 11168, Baldwin's Ind. St. 1934, in that the appellee negligently attempted to drive his motor truck in a northerly direction past an automobile parked on...
To continue reading
Request your trial