City of Jackson v. Reed

Citation102 So.2d 342,233 Miss. 280
Decision Date28 April 1958
Docket NumberNo. 40764,40764
PartiesCITY OF JACKSON, Mississippi, v. Roy Henry REED, Minor, By His Mother and Next Friend, Mrs. Henrietta Reed.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Mississippi

Butler, Snow, O'Mara, Stevens & Cannada, E. W. Stennett, W. T. Neely, Jackson, for appellant.

Lipscomb, Ray & Barksdale, Carl C. Bostic, Jackson, for appellees.

LEE, Justice.

Roy Henry Reed, a minor sixteen years of age, by his Mother and Next Friend, Mrs. Henrietta Reed, sued the City of Jackson, Mississippi, and Walter Riddley, its employee, to recover damages for personal injuries sustained as a proximate result of the alleged negligence of the defendants. There was a verdict and judgment against the defendants for the sum of $85,000, and the City appealed.

The declaration charged that a collision occurred at the intersection of North West and Manship Streets in the City of Jackson between the motorcycle on which the plaintiff was proceeding north on North West Street and the truck of the City, operated by Riddley, in the course of his employment, proceeding south on North West Street, as the truck was making a left-hand turn into Manship Street. Negligence was charged on the part of Riddley in failing to keep a proper lookout, in failing to have the truck under control, and in the way and manner in which he made the turn. Sections 8182, 8189(b), 8192, 8193, 8194, and 8196, Code of 1942 Recompiled, and Section 1683(B), City Ordinance of the City of Jackson, Mississippi, were particularly invoked.

The answer of the defendants admitted the agency of Riddley but denied all of the other material allegations of the declaration, and alleged that the truck was lawfully in the intersection and that the collision, resulting in injuries to the plaintiff, was the proximate result of his own negligence.

Two maps, showing this intersection in great detail, were introduced in evidence. North West Street at this point was forty-four feet wide from curb to curb. It had four traffic lanes. Two of these, west of the center line, eleven and eleven and one-half feet wide, were for southbound traffic; and the two lanes east of the center line, 10.7 and 10.9 feet respectively, were for northbound traffic. The center line was painted yellow, and the lines between the other lanes were painted white. In the center of this street, directly opposite the intersection by Manship Street from the east, was a sewer manhole. The paved portion of Manship Street at this point was 37.7 feet, and curbs and sidewalks were on each side. From the center of the intersection looking south, it was six hundred and fifty feet to the north curb of Fortification Street, with clear vision all of the way.

The attention of Ashton L. Wren, proceeding south in his car about half of a block behind the truck, was attracted to a commotion on the left. He stopped his car and was the first person to put a hand on the unconscious Reed boy, whose feet were tangled in the motorcycle. He indicated the position on one of the maps. The City truck had proceeded out of North West Street into Manship Street on the north side, definitely against traffic, and within a step of the north curb. The cap was off of the gas tank, about midway of the right side of the truck, and there was also an indentation on it. About one-fifth of the headlight of the motorcycle had been broken, and the handlebars pushed back, but the front wheel had not been damaged, nor had the tire been blown out.

Delmar L. Simmons, driving north on North West Street at twenty-seven or twenty-eight miles an hour, saw the Reed boy as he passed on his motorcycle, south of the intersection with Fortification Street. The boy had the green light at that intersection, but the red light caught the witness. For that reason, Simmons arrived at the scene of the collision in a matter of seconds after Wren, and gave substantial corroboration to the evidence of that witness. He said that the boy was lying one and one-half to two feet west of the east curb line of North West Street, and that the City truck was about three feet from the northeast curb of Manship Street, and that he could step from the running board of the truck to the curb.

Mrs. Ruby Nell Blackwell had seen the Reed boy leave the Y.M.C.A. building on his motorcycle just before she and her husband left in their car. The routes, taken by them, were different, but approximately the same in distance. They drove at a speed of about thirty miles an hour, and when they arrived at the scene only one or two people (evidently Wren and Simmons) had preceded them.

The unconscious and desperately injured boy was taken to the hospital where he was first examined by Dr. Lawrence W. Long, who called Dr. Charles L. Neill into the case. A tracheotomy was performed to permit breathing, and the tube was utilized for weeks. The left lung was collapsed from a fracture of the fifth rib. One of his knee joints was fractured. It was necessary to pack him in ice to reduce the body temperature to ninety-two or ninety-four degrees in order to keep fever from burning him up. The brain was scrambled or addled. The kidney functions were affected. He was in the hospital forty-two days. His mother, a practical nurse, was positive that it took about five weeks for him to regain consciousness.

Before the injury, he attended the Y.M.C.A. school for a half day because he had to work the other half; and for such work, he earned $25 per week. He was a healthy boy, with a good disposition, swam, played baseball, and danced. Since the injury, it is hard for him to speak words well and it takes time for him to do so. When he tries to walk, he stumbles or falls over. Dr. Neill doubted that the boy would ever be able to make a living or be gainfully employed. It was his opinion that he might, under supervision, learn to stack cans on a store shelf, but would not be able to operate a cash register. Dr. Long was of the opinion that the boy had made no appreciable improvement for the period of two months previous to the trial; that he has a mental age of between four and six years; that he knows nothing about the accident; and that he will require custodial care as long as he lives. Dr. Neill's bill was $445, of which Blue Cross paid $117; Dr. Long's bill was $458; the cost of nurses was $726; and the hospital bill was $1,406.02.

Walter Riddley, the driver of the truck and one of the defendants, was called as an adverse witness for the purpose of cross-examination. It was developed that, at the time of the accident, he had worked for the City only three and one-half weeks. This was his first experience in driving the kind of truck that the City used. H. D. Shearer, his foreman, was sitting in the cab with him. They were proceeding south, intending to make the left turn from North West Street into Manship Street for the purpose of going to the warehouse to obtain cement. He said that he came to a stop and stuck his hand out. A northbound car then passed. He looked south again, saw nothing, looked into Manship Street, and started his turn. He said that he did not see the motorcycle before he stated to turn or after he had turned. In fact he did not see it at all until after the collision. After he turned, Shearer said, 'Watch, he is coming right into you', and in just a second the motorcycle hit the truck. After a full explanation of the map was made to him, he was asked to take a pencil and draw the course which he followed in making the left turn. He drew on the map both a dotted and a solid line, with only slight variations. He also put an 'x' where he stopped originally and started up for the turn. According to this drawing, he did not go around the sewer manhole, which is in the center of the intersection, keeping it to his left, but cut into his left about halfway between the north line of the intersection and the manhole, definitely against any traffic that might have been coming out of Manship Street. The witness admitted that the City authorities, on Friday before the trial, had him at the scene of the collision; that a white man made several practice runs, and then said, 'Come on, Walter, let's see you practice some'; that he pulled up and back six or eight times; that he was trying to get the truck next to the curb where the collision occurred; and that policemen were holding up traffic during this experiment. When he was asked if he was practicing for this trial, he replied 'Not as I know of, I don't know, sir, I just don't know what I was doing.'

H. D. Shearer, Foreman of the Sewer Department, in testifying for the defendants, said that he told Riddley to make the lefthand turn at Manship Street, but he did not know whether in fact a signal for that purpose was given. The truck stopped to let traffic pass, and then started the turn. The witness looked south and the motorcycle was not there. The second time he looked, he saw the motorcycle three hundred and fifty or four hundred feet away. The truck at the time was moving not over three, four or five miles an hour, and its front end was on the middle line that divides the two northbound traffic lanes. When the motorcycle was about fifty or sixty feet away, the witness said 'Walter, he is going to hit us.' He estimated its speed at fifty miles an hour, and the motorcycle hit by the time he finished the statement to Riddley. The driver then whirled his truck to the left. At the time of the collision, the motorcycle was about two feet from the east curb. It hit the gas tank of the truck. He said that the truck traveled about six or seven feet after the collision. He admitted that it was nearer the north curb of Manship Street when it stopped, and that the motorcycle did not move the truck.

This witness, although it was fully explained to him, said that he did not understand the map well enough to indicate where the truck started its turn. He did,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Cuevas v. Royal D'Iberville Hotel
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • November 12, 1986
    ...is usually one for the jury. Dr. Pepper Bottling Co. of Miss. v., Bruner, 245 Miss. 276, 148 So.2d 199 (1962); City of Jackson v. Reed, 233 Miss. 280, 102 So.2d 342 (1958); Mathews v. Thompson, 231 Miss. 258, 95 So.2d 438 (1957); American Creosote Works of La. v. Harp, 215 Miss. 5, 60 So.2d......
  • Meaut v. Langlinais
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 6, 1961
    ...Works of Louisiana v. Harp, 215 Miss. 5, 60 So.2d 514, 35 A.L.R.2d 603; Toler v. Owens, 231 Miss. 753, 97 So.2d 728; City of Jackson v. Reed, 233 Miss. 280, 102 So.2d 342, 103 So.2d 6; Hardy v. Lambert, 5 Cir., 252 F.2d 709. The court should have permitted this case to go the jury, and shou......
  • Brown v. McCoy
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • August 23, 1978
    ...alone that neither party is entitled to use as a witness where all the facts and circumstances are in evidence. In City of Jackson v. Reed, 233 Miss. 280, 102 So.2d 342 (1958), the driver admitted that he did not comply with Mississippi Code Annotated section 8189 (1942), which had been ado......
  • Netterville v. Crawford
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • May 19, 1958
    ...255 P.2d 223; Pohlman v. Perry, 122 Ind.App, 222, 103 N.E.2d 911; Wheat v. Teche Lines, Inc., 181 Miss. 408, 179 So. 553; City of Jackson v. Reed, Miss., 102 So.2d 342, not yet reported in state reports. Not all of the cited cases deal with the question of granting or refusing instructions,......
  • 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