Grandhagen v. Grandhagen

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Wisconsin
• Writing for the Court: STEVENS
• Citation: 199 Wis. 315,225 N.W. 935
• Decision Date: 24 June 1929
• Parties: GRANDHAGEN v. GRANDHAGEN ET AL. (TWO CASES).

199 Wis. 315
225 N.W. 935

GRANDHAGEN
v.
GRANDHAGEN ET AL. (TWO CASES).

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

June 24, 1929.

Appeals from judgments of the Superior Court for Douglas County; Archibald McKay, Judge. Reversed.

Separate actions by Tina Grandhagen and John Grandhagen against Oscar Grandhagen and the General Casualty Company of Wisconsin were begun in March, 1928, and tried together to recover for personal injuries sustained by Tina Grandhagen when riding as a passenger in a car driven by Oscar Grandhagen. From separate judgments entered October 8, 1928, dismissing the actions against General Casualty Company and assessing damages against Oscar Grandhagen in favor of Tina Grandhagen and John Grandhagen, both defendants appealed.

Tina Grandhagen was a guest in an automobile driven by Oscar Grandhagen. The jury found that Oscar Grandhagen was negligent in failing to keep a proper lookout and in failing to have his automobile under proper control, and that such negligence was the proximate cause of the injuries sustained by Tina Grandhagen; that Oscar Grandhagen was not the agent or servant of Tina Grandhagen in transporting her; and that Tina Grandhagen did not acquiesce in the manner in which Oscar Grandhagen was watching the road or driving the car.

[225 N.W. 936]

Richmond, Jackman, Wilkie & Toebaas, of Madison, for appellants.

Curran & Sher, of Superior, for respondents.

STEVENS, J.

[1] 1. The first issue presented is whether there is evidence to sustain the findings of the jury that Oscar Grandhagen was guilty of negligence. The defendants contend that he was required to act in a sudden emergency and that the injuries sustained by Tina Grandhagen were caused by unavoidable accident.

Oscar Grandhagen testified that he was looking ahead, watching the road with both hands on the steering wheel, when an occupant of the car called his attention to the fact that there was a bee on his arm; that, keeping his left hand on the steering wheel, he struck at the bee with his right hand, at the same time looking towards the bee instead of at the road for the space of a few seconds. Just at this time the car struck a soft spot in the road with loose gravel upon it. Oscar Grandhagen testified that the wheel seemed to turn out of his hand as the car started toward the side of the road. He was not able to turn the automobile back onto the gravelled part of the highway, and its right wheels sank in the soft earth on the edge of the shoulder, and tipped over, causing injury to plaintiff Tina Grandhagen. Before Oscar Grandhagen tried to kill the bee, the car had been traveling at from 20 to 25 miles per hour over a hard-surfaced gravelled state trunk highway.

This testimony presents a rather close question of fact. But the court is satisfied, after reviewing the entire record, that it does present a question for the jury.

“An automobile moving at an ordinary speed requires the constant attention of the driver, if it is not to become a menace to the safety of its occupants, as well as pedestrians. The locomotive engineer may contemplate the landscape with comparative assurance that his train will not run into the ditch, but the driver of an automobile may take but momentary glances at his surroundings if he...