Denunzio v. Donahue

Decision Date07 October 1924
Citation265 S.W. 299,204 Ky. 705
PartiesDENUNZIO v. DONAHUE.
CourtKentucky Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Common Pleas Branch Third Division.

Action by Mary Donahue against Mark Denunzio. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Walter E. Huffaker, and Fred Forcht, both of Louisville, for appellant.

Ernest Macpherson and Matt O'Doherty, both of Louisville, for appellee.

SAMPSON C.J.

The automobile of appellant, Denunzio, collided with that in which Mary Donahue was riding on Baxter avenue near Beechwood, in the city of Louisville, on March 27, 1921 causing an injury to Miss Donahue for which she instituted an action and recovered $1,030 in damages. This appeal is to reverse that judgment. The accident happened about 6:30 to 7 o'clock on a very rainy evening. It was dark. The car in which Miss Donahue rode was driven by Adams, and was a Ford of the touring type, while the car driven by young Denunzio son of appellant, was a Ford coupe. With Miss Donahue, a governess, were several young ladies whom she had been chaperoning in the country. Her car was driving north on Baxter avenue, while the Denunzio car was going south on the same avenue.

According to the plaintiff's evidence her lights had gone out as she came into town, and her attention had been called to this by a traffic policeman who instructed her to proceed very slowly, not exceeding eight miles per hour, in going through town. She says she observed the officer's directions, and was traveling very slowly as she approached the intersection of Beechwood over which hung a bright arc light. Passing under the light she crossed the intersection to the north side of Beechwood some 20 or 30 feet, when the car driven by Denunzio suddenly turned from the west side of the street towards the car in which she was riding on the right side of the street, and ran into it, causing the injury of which she complains. She says, as do her witnesses, that the Denunzio car had no lights, but that the arc light was so bright that she saw the approach of the Denunzio car some 50 feet away and that Denunzio had opportunity to see and know of the presence of the Donahue car as it came under the bright light which covered the intersection. She also proved rather satisfactorily that the Denunzio car was traveling at a rapid rate, and was not under control.

The evidence for Denunzio was to the effect that he left the store of his father about 6 o'clock to go to the home of his friend, Harry Hibbs, at the northeast corner of Baxter avenue and Beechwood; that he went by his home and was proceeding south on Baxter avenue, keeping to the right side thereof until he approached the intersection of Beechwood when he attempted to turn into that street; that he did not see the Donahue car until he was within about 5 feet of it, and that he could not stop, and was struck on the right side by the Donahue car; that he did not know whether his lights were on at the time or not, but he stated they were in good condition next morning after the wreck. It will thus be seen that both Miss Donahue and Mr. Denunzio claimed that the car in which...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Lieberman v. McLaughlin
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 4 Marzo 1930
    ...speed immaterial, since it was not a proximate cause of the injury. Knecht v. Buckshorn, 233 Ky. 329, 25 S.W. (2d) 727; Denunzio v. Donahue, 204 Ky. 705, 265 S.W. 299; Blackman v. Streicher, 205 Ky. 773, 266 S.W. 633. Moreover, the officer's estimate as to the speed of the car was impaired ......
  • Peak v. Arnett
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • 4 Marzo 1930
    ...theory of the case in so far as it found support in the evidence. Shafer v. C. & O.R. Co., 228 Ky. 219, 14 S.W. (2d) 780; Denunzio v. Donahue, 204 Ky. 705, 265 S.W. 299. And that was done by an instruction which told the jury that it was the duty of plaintiff, if the signal was green for ea......
  • Peak v. Arnett
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • 4 Marzo 1930
    ... ... so far as it found support in the evidence. Shafer v. C ... & O. R. Co., 228 Ky. 219, 14 S.W.2d 780; Denunzio v ... Donahue, 204 Ky. 705, 265 S.W. 299. And that was done by ... an instruction which told the jury that it was the duty of ... plaintiff, if ... ...
  • Knecht v. Buckshorn
    • United States
    • Kentucky Court of Appeals
    • 4 Marzo 1930
    ...boy would have been injured just the same if the car had been moving at a much slower rate of speed, or even standing still. Cf. Denunzio v. Donahue, supra. There is no room for inference that the speed of the car, whatever it may have been, brought about the injury of appellant. While prox......
  • 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