Brooks v. Dickey, No. 52883

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa
Writing for the CourtMOORE
Citation158 N.W.2d 11,261 Iowa 1213
PartiesHarold BROOKS, Appellant, v. Donald DICKEY, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 52883
Decision Date09 April 1968

Page 11

158 N.W.2d 11
261 Iowa 1213
Harold BROOKS, Appellant,
v.
Donald DICKEY, Appellee.
No. 52883.
Supreme Court of Iowa.
April 9, 1968.

[261 Iowa 1214]

Page 12

Eckhardt, Goedken & Burns, Muscatine, for appellant.

Seymore M. Raben, Davenport, for appellee.

MOORE, Justice.

This is a law action tried to the court for damages to automobiles resulting from collision on a narrow bridge. Plaintiff Harold Brooks appeals from denial of his claim and judgment for defendant Donald Dickey on his counterclaim. We affirm.

About 9:30 a.m. March 7, 1966, plaintiff was driving his 1962 Ford in a southerly direction on County Road W in Muscatine County. Located thereon approximately 10 miles west of Muscatine is a bridge 300 feet long, 15 1/2 feet wide, commonly known as Salisbury Bridge. We take judicial notice this is a relatively narrow bridge by modern standards. In any event, several witnesses so described it. The approach to the bridge from the west curves over a distance of approximately 300 feet resulting in a ninety degree directional change so that the road actually runs east and west across the bridge.

Defendant's wife, accompanied by two of her minor children, was then driving defendant's 1964 Oldsmobile in a westerly direction across the bridge. A collision of the left front corners of the two vehicles occurred about six feet east of the west end of the bridge. On trial the parties stipulated the amount of damages to each vehicle.

Each driver had traveled the road on several prior occasions and was familiar with the width and flow of traffic across the bridge.

Plaintiff testified he saw defendant's car midway on the bridge as he was negotiating the curve leading to it from the west. Defendant's wife observed plaintiff's vehicle about the same time. Both estimated their respective speeds as 15 to 20 miles per hour when each first saw the other.

Plaintiff further testified that upon seeing defendant's car he began decelerating on the somewhat slick gravel road and [261 Iowa 1215] eventually came to a complete stop with the front eight feet of his car on the bridge and the rear remaining on the gravel road. His vehicle was stopped within three inches from the south guardrail of the bridge.

The record supports the conclusion plaintiff accomplished this stop when defendant's car was approximately 15 feet to the east. Defendant's vehicle continued, was not turned to the right (north) and the collision resulted. No personal injuries resulted.

On the day of the mishap the visibility was clear although snow had fallen the previous day, resulting in a one inch snow cover. Plaintiff stated the approch to the bridge was somewhat slippery, causing him to pump his brakes to avoid sliding while stopping his car. Only one set of tire tracks led across the bridge and these had been caused by cars following the same path. These tracks proceeded down the center of the bridge and were being followed by Mrs. Dickey.

The impact thrust plaintiff's car directly rearward approximately three feet. Mrs. Dickey testified she turned to the right in an attempt to avoid the collision but the physical facts do not support this contention and the trial...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Pella Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., No. 4:11-cv-00273-JEG
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States State District Court of Southern District of Iowa
    • November 1, 2016
    ...conduct, and indeed is often used to establish a duty that a defendant breached by its negligence. See, e.g. , Brooks v. Dickey , 261 Iowa 1213, 158 N.W.2d 11, 13 (1968) ( "[N]oncompliance with custom is some proof of lack of due care on the issue of negligence if it is shown the party char......
  • Grall v. Meyer, No. 53634
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 9, 1969
    ...v. Marietta, 258 Iowa 106, 109, 138 N.W.2d 107, 109; Schnabel v. Vanghn, 258 Iowa 839, 845, 140 N.W.2d 168, 172; Brooks v. Dickey, Iowa, 158 N.W.2d 11, 13. Another is that negligence, contributory negligence and proximate cause are ordinarily questions to be determined by the trier of fact.......
  • Capener v. Duin, No. 53728
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 9, 1969
    ...we must view the evidence most favorable to him. Clark v. Marietta, 258 Iowa 106, 109, 138 N.W.2d 107, 109; Brooks v. Dickey, Iowa, 158 N.W.2d 11, II. From the record we learn that Wendell Capener, whom we shall refer to as plaintiff herein, is a 40-year-old mail carrier at Spencer, Iowa, a......
  • Board of Ed. of Green Mountain Independent School Dist. v. Iowa State Bd. of Public Instruction, No. 52870
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 9, 1968
    ...affected. Perhaps the necessity for such reconsideration is more readily apparent when one considers the harassed defendant was required,[261 Iowa 1213] between April 29, 1966 and July 15, 1966, to consider and act upon 683 attachment proceedings. To require that each should immediately bec......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Pella Corp. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., No. 4:11-cv-00273-JEG
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 8th Circuit. United States State District Court of Southern District of Iowa
    • November 1, 2016
    ...conduct, and indeed is often used to establish a duty that a defendant breached by its negligence. See, e.g. , Brooks v. Dickey , 261 Iowa 1213, 158 N.W.2d 11, 13 (1968) ( "[N]oncompliance with custom is some proof of lack of due care on the issue of negligence if it is shown the party char......
  • Grall v. Meyer, No. 53634
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 9, 1969
    ...v. Marietta, 258 Iowa 106, 109, 138 N.W.2d 107, 109; Schnabel v. Vanghn, 258 Iowa 839, 845, 140 N.W.2d 168, 172; Brooks v. Dickey, Iowa, 158 N.W.2d 11, 13. Another is that negligence, contributory negligence and proximate cause are ordinarily questions to be determined by the trier of fact.......
  • Capener v. Duin, No. 53728
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • December 9, 1969
    ...we must view the evidence most favorable to him. Clark v. Marietta, 258 Iowa 106, 109, 138 N.W.2d 107, 109; Brooks v. Dickey, Iowa, 158 N.W.2d 11, II. From the record we learn that Wendell Capener, whom we shall refer to as plaintiff herein, is a 40-year-old mail carrier at Spencer, Iowa, a......
  • Board of Ed. of Green Mountain Independent School Dist. v. Iowa State Bd. of Public Instruction, No. 52870
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
    • April 9, 1968
    ...affected. Perhaps the necessity for such reconsideration is more readily apparent when one considers the harassed defendant was required,[261 Iowa 1213] between April 29, 1966 and July 15, 1966, to consider and act upon 683 attachment proceedings. To require that each should immediately bec......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT