Clayton v. Taylor

• Decision Date: 10 March 1952
• Docket Number: No. 3881,3881
• Citation: Clayton v. Taylor, 193 Va. 555, 69 S.E.2d 424 (1952)
• Parties: ROBERT D. CLAYTON v. JAMES A. TAYLOR. Record
• Court: Virginia Supreme Court

Page 424

69 S.E.2d 424

193 Va. 555

ROBERT D. CLAYTON v.JAMES A. TAYLOR.

Record No. 3881.

Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia

March 10, 1952.

I. W. Jacobs and Murray, Ford, West & Wilkinson, for the plaintiff in error.

Taylor, Hall & Martin and Robert Lewis Young, for the defendant in error.

JUDGE: MILLER

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

A verdict and judgment were recovered by James A. Taylor against Robert D. Clayton for damages resulting from personal injuries sustained by Taylor when an automobile which he was driving was in collision with a car driven by Clayton.

The accident happened about 6:45 p.m. on the 3rd day of March, 1950, at the intersection of Roanoke avenue and 16th street in the city of Newport News.Roanoke avenue extends in a northerly and southerly direction and is intersected at right angles by 16th street which is 44 feet wide.North of 16th street, the width of Roanoke avenue is also 44 feet, but south of 16th street, it has a width of 64 feet.However, from 16th street southwardly Roanoke avenue is divided in the center by a grass plot or island 20 feet wide, thus leaving two vehicular traffic lanes each 22 feet wide.

The northern end of the 20 foot wide grass plot, or island, sits back from and begins three feet south of the southern curb line of 16th street extended across Roanoke avenue.The fact that Roanoke avenue is 20 feet wider south of 16th street than it is north of that street causes its eastern and western curb lines south of 16th street to sit back ten feet more than do those curb lines north of 16th street.Otherwise, briefly stated, Roanoke avenue is 20 feet wider south of 16th street than it is north thereof, and thus its curb lines, if extended straight across 16th street, would not meet.

A block from Roanoke avenue in a westerly direction is Orcutt avenue, and the distance between these two parellel streets is 600 feet.

Clayton contends that the testimony of Taylor himself is irreconcilable with the physical facts, unbelievable and incredible, and thus precludes any recovery by him.He also asserts that Taylor's testimony is in conflict with that of his own chief witness, William R. Jennings, and of such character as to convict him (Taylor) of contributory negligence as a matter of law, and that there is insufficient proof of primary negligence on his (Clayton's) part to support the verdict and judgment.

Conflicts in the testimony and all just inferences that may be drawn from the evidence have been resolved by the jury in Taylor's favor, and we must view the evidence in the light most favorable to him.The judgment may not be reversed unless it is clearly against the evidence or is without credible evidence to support it.

The maximum speed at which motor vehicles were permitted to travel upon either Roanoke avenue or 16th street at the location in question is conceded to have been 25 miles per hour.

At the time of the accident it was sufficiently dark to need lights upon motor vehicles, and the headlights of both cars were burning.Many vehicles traverse this crossing and a traffic light to caution drivers was located over the center of the intersection.Its amber light was usually kept operating -- 'flashing' -- to warn and caution traffic, and it was so operating at the time of the mishap.As Taylor drove his car southwardly along Roanoke avenue and while he was crossing 16th street, it was struck on the right side by Clayton's automobile which was being driven eastwardly along 16th street.

Summarized, Taylor's testimony bearing upon the speed at which his car was traveling as he approached and entered the intersection, when he first saw Clayton's car, and the manner in which he undertook to negotiate the crossing follows:

He approached the intersection from the north at a moderate speed, well within the limit allowed by law, and when about 40 or 50 feet from 16th street, he looked east and saw no vehicles, and when about to enter or entering 16th street at a speed of from 10 to 15 miles an hour, he looked west and saw Clayton's car, which was down near Orcutt avenue.He undertook to describe its then location by saying, '* * * it was quite a ways down the street * * *'

* * *

'He was pretty well down toward the other corner.Of course, that's a short block in there.We know that.'

To further inquiries concerning the location of the Clayton car when he first saw it, he answered as below:

'A.No, he wasn't near my corner.He was down the street.

'Q.He was nearer Orcutt avenue?

'A.Yes, sir.'

* * *

'A.I'll tell you when I entered, when I got on to 16th street or was driving over the sidewalk on the north side of 16th street, I saw the car coming all right.'

* * *

'Q.But he was right on top of you at that time?He was right on top of you wasn't he?

'A.No, sir, I don't think that.

'Q.Didn't you tell Mr. Pitts he was?

'A.I told you what I have told everybody.All of us can be mistaken.I've told everybody that I saw the car, I turned, looked straight ahead and I never knew anything more and that's the straight naked truth.'

* * *

'Yes, sir.I saw the car and he wasn't right on me either.'

* * *

'* * * I remember mighty well today when I first saw that car I saw it plenty far away.'

When asked if he applied his brakes or made any effort to turn left to avoid a collision, he said,

'No, sir, I was going in the mouth of the street at that time when I give up -- I mean when I didn't look any more.I was heading right into 16th street right into Roanoke.'

He also said that when he had gotten 'practically across the street' his car was struck on the right side by Clayton's car which he then saw for the second time when it was only a foot or two from his automobile.

The testimony of W. E. Pitts, who was at the time a police officer of the city of Newport News, was that he observed skid marks made by the Clayton car which were about 24 feet long, beginning in 16th street about 12 feet west of the intersection and continuing into the intersection 12 feet.Debris in the street and these skid marks indicated that the actual collision took place a foot or two south of the center of 16th street and about 12 feet into Roanoke avenue.The officer said that no skid marks were found to have been made by 'Mr. Taylor's car except where his car spun around (indicating) after being in the collision.'

The impact was rather severe, and Taylor was thrown from his vehicle and rendered unconscious.Both automobiles were badly damaged and turned almost around in the street, coming to rest in the intersection well south of the center line of 16th street and near the northern end of the grass plot or island.

William R. Jennings, who appeared as a witness for Taylor, testified that when the cars approached and entered the intersection, he was about 125 feet to the east of Roanoke avenue walking in a westerly direction along the north sidewalk of 16th street, and thus facing and approaching the intersection.He says that he saw Taylor's car traveling at about 15 miles per hour 'coming into 16th street', and as it 'was just entering 16th street,'he observed the other car about 100 feet west of the intersection coming toward it as a speed which he estimated to be 25 miles an hour, and that when Taylor's car 'got to the center of the street, he picked up speed to get by and then there was a collision' just 'a little more than past the middle' of the intersection.

Clayton testified that as he approached the crossing, he was driving at about 25 miles an hour and when about 55 or 60 feet from Roanoke avenue he saw the lights of Taylor's car which were about the same distance from the intersection, and that car was traveling as fast or maybe a little faster than he was.He further said that as soon as he saw Taylor's oncoming car, he realized that Taylor was not going to stop, and he immediately applied his brakes which took effect about 12 feet from the intersection and that his skid marks continued from that point a distance of 24 feet to where the impact occurred.

The specific and chief reason urged by Clayton for setting aside the verdict and judgment is that Taylor by his own testimony has stated a set of facts and circumstances that precludes a recovery.It is argued that if Clayton's car was as far to the west as it was stated to have been by Taylor when he entered the intersection, then at the speeds that the respective cars were going, the collision could not have happened.It is then asserted that Taylor's observation and estimate of the location of Clayton's car was so poor and ineffectual and his conduct so careless as to constitute contributory negligence on his part as a matter of law.

We agree that some of the statements made by Taylor are extravagant, and if the distances and locations mentioned by him are taken to mean and are treated as specific distances and locations, then it would appear to have been impossible for the collision to have happened if the automobiles were traveling at or about the speeds stated by him and other witnesses.However, when his testimony is weighed and considered as a whole, it does not appear to us that he undertook to specifically fix the speed at which his car entered 16th street, or the exact distance that Clayton's car was away at that time.He thought that the block between Roanoke avenue and Orcutt avenue...