Cook v. Cook

• Decision Date: 13 June 1933
• Citation: 166 A. 672,117 Conn. 655
• Parties: COOK v. COOK.
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court

166 A. 672

117 Conn. 655

COOK v. COOK.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

June 13, 1933

Appeal from Superior Court, New Haven County; John Rufus Booth Judge.

Action by Muriel Cook against Hubert Cook to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the reckless disregard of the rights of the plaintiff, brought to the superior court and tried to the jury. Verdict for the plaintiff, which the trial court, upon motion of the defendant, set aside as against the evidence, and from this decision the plaintiff appealed.

No error.

George W. Crawford and Nathan Shepatin, both of New Haven, for appellant.

Harry M. French and James M. Kelly, both of New Haven (Arthur B O'Keefe, of New Haven, on the brief), for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

There was a conspicuous absence of conflict in the evidence as to the salient facts bearing upon a determination whether the conduct of the defendant was such as to impose liability upon him under the " guest statute," section 1628 of the General Statutes. The plaintiff and the defendant are wife and husband. On July 5th, 1931, riding in a coupe owned and driven by the defendant, they left Brooklyn, New York, at ten o'clock in the morning to go to their home in Everett Massachusetts. Without having made any stop they reached and passed through Branford on the Boston Post Road at about three-thirty in the afternoon, and, being hungry, agreed to stop for lunch at the next place they came to along the road. Traffic was quite heavy in both directions and cars, including that of the defendant, going easterly on the southerly side of the concrete road were traveling at a rate of thirty-five to forty miles per hour. When the defendant's car came opposite the Blue Moose Tavern located northerly of the highway, and had already passed the westerly driveway leading to it, the defendant suddenly said, " We will go in here and eat," and turned his car to his left toward the easterly driveway to the inn and across the northerly lane of the highway and the line of traffic traveling herein. While crossing this lane at a right angle his car was struck broadside by a car travelling west and the plaintiff was seriously injured. The defendant testified that he did not realize the presence of the eating plan until he had passed the westerly driveway then looked at the next car approaching from the east and it seemed to him that he had opportunity to cross in...