Chris P. v. Ahasay
| Citation | 246 N.W. 670,188 Minn. 179 |
| Decision Date | 03 February 1933 |
| Docket Number | 29,366,29,367,29,368 |
| Parties | CHRIS P., SAMONTHIA, AND MYRL JACOBSEN v. E. P. AHASAY AND ANOTHER |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Three actions in the district court for Anoka county, consolidated for trial and heard together on appeal, two by Samonthia and Myrl Jacobsen to recover for injuries sustained by them when an auto in which they were riding was struck by a car owned by the defendant George Ahasay and driven by his son, the defendant E. P. Ahasay; and the other by Chris P. Jacobsen the husband of Samonthia, to recover for loss of his wife's services resulting from such injuries. The cases were tried before Arthur E. Giddings, Judge, and a jury. There was a verdict for defendants in each case, and plaintiffs separately appealed from the judgments entered pursuant thereto. Reversed.
Automobile -- contributory negligence of passengers.
On the record before us, passenger plaintiffs were free from contributory negligence as a matter of law.
B. W Wilder, A. C. Johnston, and F. M. Miner, for appellants.
W. A. Blanchard and Orr, Stark, Kidder & Freeman, for respondents.
These three cases grew out of an automobile accident occurring at the intersection of Western and University avenues in the city of St. Paul about four o'clock in the morning of November 7, 1931. The two Jacobsen women were passengers in an automobile which was struck by the defendants' car, and they seek to recover damages. The suit by Chris P. Jacobsen is to recover for loss of services and for expenses in connection with the injuries to his wife, Samonthia. The trial court submitted the question of the contributory negligence of the Jacobsen women to the jury, which found in favor of the defendants, and the cases came here upon appeal from the judgments entered pursuant to the verdicts after the denial of plaintiffs' motions for a new trial, the sole question presented being whether or not the court erred in submitting the question of contributory negligence to the jury. There appears to be no doubt about the negligence of the defendants, and hence if the women were free from contributory negligence as a matter of law a new trial must be ordered.
The defendants are entitled to have the evidence viewed from the standpoint most favorable to them. The women were passengers in a Studebaker coach in which seven people were riding, and it is the contention of the defendants that the car was overloaded and that consequently that fact was an element which was to be considered by the jury in determining whether the women were guilty of contributory negligence. We find nothing in the record which indicates that the presence of the seven passengers in the car in any way interfered with the driver's ability to handle it or to keep a lookout. The next contention of defendants is that the driver entered University avenue at a rate of speed higher than that permitted by statute at a blind corner and that he passed the boulevard stop sign without stopping. The car in which the plaintiffs were riding was going south on Western avenue, and when it entered University avenue the driver and Samonthia Jacobsen saw the defendants' car approaching from the right at such a distance that they were sure they could pass safely over the intersection before the arrival of the defendants' car therein. They were struck after the front end of their car was beyond the south curb line of University...
To continue reading
Request your trial