Brown v. Branch, Record No. 2229.

• Decision Date: 10 June 1940
• Docket Number: Record No. 2229.
• Citation: 175 Va. 382
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court
• Parties: CHARLES L. BROWN, ETC. v. GEORGE BRANCH. IRENE BROWN v. GEORGE BRANCH.

Page 382

175 Va. 382

CHARLES L. BROWN, ETC. v. GEORGE BRANCH.

IRENE BROWN v. GEORGE BRANCH.

Record No. 2229.

Supreme Court of Virginia, Wythebille.

June 10, 1940.

Present, All the Justices.

1. AUTOMOBILES — Host and Guest — Evidence Showing that Plaintiff Was Gratuitous Guest — Case at Bar. — In the instant case, an action for injuries received by plaintiff while riding in defendant's truck, plaintiff contended that he was present in the truck in the capacity of a pay passenger, while defendant contended that plaintiff was a gratuitous guest. The evidence showed that defendant was superintendent of a Sunday School which gave free transportation to plaintiff and others on a picnic, but required them to pay for their food. There was no evidence, however, to sustain the contention that defendant derived any financial benefit from the picnic or from the sale of food there. Plaintiff further contended that he rendered services in payment of his transportation to and from the picnic, and that he went with defendant at his request to pick up other passengers and assist in unloading the truck at the picnic grounds, and that on the return trip he held an empty ice cream freezer at defendant's request.

Held: That since the trivial courtesies rendered by plaintiff were such as migh be expected of a guest by his host, and since the evidence failed to show that defendant derived any pecuniary benefit from his transportation of plaintiff, or from the latter's attendance at the picnic, and likewise failed to show the existence of any contractual relation between the parties, plaintiff was a gratuitous guest and not a passenger in the truck at the time of the accident.

2. AUTOMOBILES — Action by Guest against Host — Questions of Law and Fact — Existence of Gross Negligence — Case at Bar. — In the instant case, an action for injuries received by plaintiff while riding in defendant's truck, the evidence on the part of plaintiff tended to show that due to a defect, which was known to defendant, the truck would not remain in high gear unless the lever was held in place, and that in attempting to place an object under the gear lever defendant took his eyes off the road momentarily, as the result of which the truck ran off the road, causing plaintiff's injuries. While defendant admitted that the gear shift was defective, he claimed that the lever was held in place by an attachment which he had placed on the dashboard. He denied that the accident was due in any way to the defective gear shift or his attempt to correct it, but attributed the accident to a locked steering gear, and there was other testimony tending to corroborate defendant's story.

Held: That whether defendant was guilty of gross negligence was a question for the jury.

Error to judgments of the Circuit Court of the city of Richmond. Hon. Julien Gunn, judge presiding.

The opinion states the case.

Thomas A. Williams and L. C. O'Connor, for the plaintiffs in error.

Parrish, Butcher & Parrish, T. C. Gordon, Jr., and Edward P. Simpkins, Jr., for the defendant in error.

EGGLESTON, J., delivered the opinion of the court.

Charles L. Brown, nineteen years of age, while riding in a truck owned and operated by George Branch, was injured when the vehicle ran off the road into a ditch. Brown brought suit against Branch for damages for his injuries. Irene Brown, the mother of Charles L. Brown, brought suit against Branch to recover the medical expenses incurred by her as the result of her son's injuries. By agreement both suits were tried together. For convenience Charles L. Brown will be sometimes referred to as the plaintiff and George Branch as the defendant. The parties are negroes.

The plaintiffs in both suits claimed that Charles L. Brown was being carried in the truck as a "pay passenger," while the defendant contended that he was a gratuitous guest. At the conclusion of all of the evidence the court instructed the jury that the plaintiff was a gratuitous guest of the defendant and submitted to the jury whether the latter was guilty of gross negligence which caused the injuries complained of. In each of the cases the jury returned a verdict for the defendant upon which the trial court entered judgment. The matter is before us on a writ of error granted the plaintiffs below.

The accident happened under these circumstances: Just outside of the limits of the city of Richmond is a negro community known as Woodville. Some time before the accident there was organized the Woodville Improvement League, a charitable organization operated without profit for the general welfare and betterment of the community. Among its activities was the operation of a Sunday school, of which the defendant, George Branch, was the superintendent.

The league officials decided to give the members of the Sunday school an outing on July 4, 1938. A committee composed of three women members of the league was appointed to make arrangements for the picnic, which was to be held at the Mosby place in Hanover county, some five miles from Woodville.

Three other members of the league, George Branch, Clarence Friend, and William Wall, all of whom had children in the Sunday school, offered the use of their trucks, free of charge, to transport the members and their guests to and from the picnic.

In order to finance the outing some members of the league had made small contributions. These were used by the committee to purchase food, which was prepared in the homes of the various members and taken to the picnic. George Branch and his wife made ice cream which was given to the league. Each member of the Sunday school was given his lunch free of charge. Those not members of the league or of the...