Grabowski v. Seyler, 35.

• Decision Date: 03 January 1933
• Docket Number: No. 35.,35.
• Parties: GRABOWSKI v. SEYLER.
• Court: Michigan Supreme Court

261 Mich. 473

246 N.W. 189

GRABOWSKI

v.SEYLER.

No. 35.

Supreme Court of Michigan.

Jan. 3, 1933.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Washtenaw County; George W. Sample, Judge.

Action by Dorothy Grabowski against Archie Seyler. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals.

Reversed, and judgment directed to be entered for defendant.

Argued before the Entire Bench.

Frank B. De Vine, of Ann Arbor, for appellant.

Jacob F. Fahrner, Carl A. Lehman, and Raymond Klaasen, all of Ann Arbor, for appellee.

POTTER, J.

Plaintiff sued the defendant to recover damages alleged to have been suffered by her by reason of defendant's gross negligence and willful and wanton misconduct in driving his automobile westerly on United States trunk line highway 12 on the morning of February 7, 1931, at which time he ran into a truck going westerly on United States trunk line 12, resulting in injury to plaintiff, damages for which she seeks to recover in this case. Plaintiff was a guest of defendant. The case was tried without a jury, and plaintiff awarded a judgment of $9,500 and costs. Defendant appeals, contending that under the facts he was not guilty of gross negligence or wanton or willful misconduct in the operation of his automobile in which plaintiff was riding as his guest. On the morning in question, defendant, his wife, father-in-law, and mother-in-law started from east of Chelsea to Jackson. At Chelsea they picked up plaintiff, who rode in the back seat of defendant's automobile. They got an early start, and it was dark. It had been misting and raining and the road was slippery, and, by reason of its snowing, snow and sleet formed on the windshield of defendant's automobile. The windshield wiper on defendant's car was one that worked by hand. There was some talk between the parties in the automobile about turning back on account of the storm. Defendant thought they could get through to Jackson allright, and they went on. Near Leoni the highway passes under the Michigan Central Railroad tracks. Near the top of the hill, east of the tracks, defendant met a truck going east. As he entered the winding cut through which the highway passes under the railroad, he saw a truck ahead of him. He turned out and attempted to pass, and, as he says, did everything he could to avoid an accident. The truck was poorly lighted. The front wheels of defendant's automobile passed the trailer attached to the truck, but the rear wheels skidded on the ice, and the automobile hit the corner of the trailer attached to the truck, and plaintiff was injured.

The term ‘gross negligence’ prescribes no standard of conduct. There are no degrees of negligence in this state. The doctrine of comparative negligence is unknown to our law. Contributory negligence is no defense to an action based upon gross negligence or willful or wanton misconduct. If the defendant, under the...