Goncalves v. Los Banos Min. Co.

Decision Date18 December 1962
Parties, 376 P.2d 833 Delfina GONCALVES, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. LOS BANOS MINING COMPANY et al., Defendants and Respondents; Joe Menezes, Defendant and Appellant. S. F. 21150.
CourtCalifornia Supreme Court

Chadeayne & Wilkinson, Tracy, Kroloff, Brown, Belcher & Smart, Stockton, and Robert R. Elledge, Modesto, for plaintiff and appellant.

McCormick, Barstow, Sheppard & Coyle, Fresno, and William B. Boone, Santa Rosa, for defendant and appellant.

Zeff, Halley & Price and William Zeff, Modesto, for defendants and respondents.

GIBSON, Chief Justice.

Plaintiff, widow of Ernest Goncalves, brought this action for damages suffered by reason of her husband's death in an intersection collision between a car driven by defendant Menezes, in which decedent was riding as a guest, and a car operated by defendant Marjorie Sanchez in the course of her employment by defendant Los Banos Mining Company.

The jury returned a verdict for plaintiff against Menezes, but against her and in favor of Mrs. Sanchez and Los Banos. Menezes appeals from the judgment against him, and plaintiff appeals from the judgment for Los Banos and Mrs. Sanchez.

The sole question presented on the appeal by Menezes is whether the evidence is sufficient to show that he was guilty of wilful misconduct and that such misconduct was a proximate cause of the accident.

The accident occurred at the intersection of Pioneer and Ortegalita Roads in Merced County. Decedent was riding in the front seat of the Menezes car, which was proceeding in a westerly direction on Pioneer Road. Mrs. Sanchez was traveling on Ortegalita Road toward the south. Ortegalita was a through highway, and there were stop signs on Pioneer at the intersection. Both were straight, level roads traversing a flat farming country. The area northeast of the intersection was covered by alfalfa and clover, except for some weeds along the roads which rose to a level of two to three feet, and drivers traveling west and south toward the intersection could see each other's automobile.

At the time of the accident, Menezes, Frank Deniz, Mrs. Deniz and decedent were returning home after attending a funeral. Menezes, who had never been on either Pioneer or Ortegalita Road before, was driving at a speed of about 60 miles per hour, which was five miles per hour in excess of the prima facie speed limit. The stop sign was plainly visible, and when they were over 200 feet from the intersection decedent said to Menezes, 'Joe, look, there is a stop ahead.' Menezes did not look to his right or left as he neared the intersection and did not apply his brakes until immediately before the impact. He did not wear glasses and had not had any problem with his vision prior to the accident.

Wilful misconduct means intentional wrongful conduct, done either with knowledge that serious injury to the guest probably will result or with a wanton and reckless disregard of the possible results. (Gillespie v. Rawlings, 49 Cal.2d 359, 367, 317 P.2d 601.)

The jury could have found that Menezes knew of the existence of the stop sign in sufficient time to avoid a collision by reducing his speed or stopping but that he decided to ignore the sign and proceeded into the intersection without attempting to abate his excessive rate of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • Mittelman v. Seifert
    • United States
    • California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • April 23, 1971
    ...guest probably will result or with a wanton and reckless disregard of the possible results.' (Goncalves v. Los Banos Mining Co. (1962) 58 Cal.2d 916, 918, 26 Cal.Rptr. 769, 771, 376 P.2d 833, 835.) Such knowledge, and wantonness and recklessness can be implied. The probability of serious in......
  • Calvillo-Silva v. Home Grocery
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • December 17, 1998
    ...guest statute]; Meyer v. Blackman (1963) 59 Cal.2d 668, 677, 31 Cal.Rptr. 36, 381 P.2d 916 [same]; Goncalves v. Los Banos Mining Co. (1962) 58 Cal.2d 916, 918, 26 Cal.Rptr. 769, 376 P.2d 833 [same]; Colich & Sons v. Pacific Bell, supra, 198 Cal.App.3d at p. 1242, 244 Cal.Rptr. 714; see also......
  • Potter v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
    • United States
    • California Supreme Court
    • December 27, 1993
    ...(Williams v. Carr (1968) 68 Cal.2d 579, 584, 68 Cal.Rptr. 305, 440 P.2d 505; see also Goncalves v. Los Banos Mining Co. (1962) 58 Cal.2d 916, 918, 26 Cal.Rptr. 769, 376 P.2d 833; Bastian v. County of San Luis Obispo (1988) 199 Cal.App.3d 520, 533, 245 Cal.Rptr. 78; Prosser & Keeton on Torts......
  • Lightenburger v. Gordon
    • United States
    • Nevada Supreme Court
    • November 10, 1965
    ...cases and the intervening cases, Cope v. Davison (1947) 30 Cal.2d 193, 180 P.2d 873, 171 A.L.R. 667; Goncalves v. Los Banos Mining Co. (1952) 58 Cal.2d 916, 26 Cal.Rptr. 769, 376 P.2d 833; Meyer v. Blackman (1963) 59 Cal.2d 668, 31 Cal.Rptr. 36, 381 P.2d 916; Emery v. Emery (1955) 45 Cal.2d......
  • 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