Calhoun v. Lasinski
| Decision Date | 13 September 1949 |
| Parties | CALHOUN v. LASINSKI et al. HOPPE v. LASINSKI et al. |
| Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Fond du Lac County; Clarence C. Rinehard, Judge.
Reversed.
Action for damages for personal injuries and property damage resulting from a collision involving the automobile of the defendant Ted Lasinski and that of the plaintiff Norma Calhoun. The case was tried to a jury and from a judgment for the defendant on the verdict, plaintiffs appeal. The material facts will be stated in the opinion.
John E. O'Brien, Fond du Lac, for appellant.
Ervin A. Weinke, Fond du Lac, for respondent.
The question presented is whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury both on the ‘emergency’ and the ‘unavoidable accident’ rules.
The collision occurred on the afternoon of January 11, 1946 at about four o'clock. At the scene of the collision Highway 45 extends north and south. Plaintiff Norma Calhoun was driving south on Highway 45 followed by a car driven by one Kolterman. The defendant Ted Lasinski was driving north. There was another automobile preceding him on the highway. Shortly before the accident a fifth car emerged onto the highway from a tavern and filling station to the east and traveled north between the Lasinski car and the one which had been preceding it. There was a light snow falling, but it did not impair visibility. The defendant testified that he could see a distance of 2,000 feet as he drove along the highway. Katie Hoppe, mother of Mrs. Calhoun, was a guest in the Calhoun car.
As plaintiffs were about to meet the car which came onto the highway from the filling station, defendant's car either was driven or skidded onto the west side of the roadway into their path and collided partially head-on with their car, causing damage to the Calhoun automobile and personal injuries to the plaintiffs for which they seek to recover.
It was the contention of the plaintiffs that the defendant drove onto the west side of the road in an effort to pass the car immediately ahead of him, and that he was negligent with respect to lookout, speed, management and control and in driving his automobile on the left or westerly side of the road.
There was no claim that either plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence.
The defendant testified that when the automobile came into the highway from the filling station, he was one hundred seventy-five to two hundred feet south of it; that it...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v. Alvey, 30785
...366 S.W.2d 831, 836; Cooper v. Pay-N-Save Drugs, Inc., (1962), 59 Wash.2d 829, 830, 371 P.2d 43, 44; Calhoun v. Lasinski (1949), 255 Wis. 189, 191, 38 N.W.2d 353, 354; Brewer v. Berner (1942), 15 Wash.2d 644, 648, 131 P.2d 940, 942; Yanow v. Weyerhaeuser Steamship Company (1958), 9 Cir., 25......
-
Abbott v. Truck Ins. Exchange Co.
...without negligence. Mittelstadt v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Company (1957), 2 Wis.2d 78, 85 S.W.2d 793; Calhoun v. Lasinski (1949), 255 Wis. 189, 38 N.W.2d 353. In Van Matre v. Milwaukee E.R. & T. Co. (1955), 268 Wis. 399, 67 N.W.2d 831, we stated in respect to an unavoidable accident ......