Healey v. Cockrill

• Citation: 202 S.W. 229
• Decision Date: 25 March 1918
• Docket Number: (No. 242.)
• Parties: HEALEY et al. v. COCKRILL.
• Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas

202 S.W. 229 HEALEY et al.
v.
COCKRILL. (No. 242.) Supreme Court of Arkansas. March 25, 1918.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pulaski County; Guy Fulk, Judge.

Consolidated actions by Mrs. J. H. Healey and another against Mrs. S. R. Cockrill. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Price Shofner, J. I. Trawick, and G. T. Owens, all of Little Rock, for appellants. Rose, Hemingway, Cantrell, Loughborough & Miles, of Little Rock, for appellee.

McCULLOCH, C. J.

Appellants were plaintiffs below in two separate actions instituted against appellee to recover damages on account of injuries resulting from a collision between an automobile in which appellants were riding and another automobile owned by appellee and driven by her servant. The two actions were consolidated and tried together, and after all the testimony had been introduced the court gave a peremptory instruction in favor of appellee.

The liability of appellee turns on the question whether or not the driver of her car was, at the time of the collision, acting within the scope of his employment, or whether he had completely abandoned the business of the employer and was acting entirely for himself. There is no material conflict in the statements of the witnesses concerning that feature of the case. If, under the facts proved in the case, appellee was responsible for the acts of the driver of her car at the time the collision occurred, then the case should have gone to the jury, for the testimony was sufficient to establish negligence on the part of the driver. Appellant Grace was operating a jitney on Main street in the city of Little Rock and was driving the car himself at the time of the collision under inquiry, and Mrs. Healey, the other appellant, was a passenger in the car. The evidence tended to show that appellant Grace was handling his car with care and was not responsible for the collision. As the jitney car came south on Main street, appellee's car, in charge of her driver, with no one else in it, came along Tenth street at great speed approaching Main street, and in crossing the street ran into the car occupied by appellants. Serious personal injuries were inflicted upon the occupants of the jitney car as well as damage to the car itself.

Appellee's residence was situated on the east side of Scott street (the first street east of Main street) about the middle of the block between Ninth and Tenth streets. The garage on the premises was situated in the rear of the premises and opened out on the alley running north and south through the middle of the block. Louis Jordan, who was driving the car at the time appellant was injured, had been driving for appellee for some time, and whenever appellee needed the car she instructed the driver to bring it from the garage around to...