Hogan v. Pony Exp. Courier Corp.
| Decision Date | 11 May 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. A90A0269,A90A0269 |
| Citation | 394 S.E.2d 391,195 Ga.App. 592 |
| Parties | HOGAN v. PONY EXPRESS COURIER CORPORATION et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Mathis, Sands, Jordan & Adams, Charles A. Mathis, Jr., Brian G. Combs, Virgil L. Adams, Macon, for appellant.
Webb, Carlock, Copeland, Semler & Stair, Kent T. Stair, Douglas A. Wilde, Atlanta, for appellees.
This appeal is from the trial court's grant of appellees' motion for judgment notwithstanding the mistrial in a case arising out of an automobile collision between a car in which appellant was a passenger and a tractor trailer truck.
Appellant's car was travelling in the single eastbound lane of a highway which at the point of the collision, consisted of two westbound lanes and one eastbound lane, divided by a double yellow line. It is undisputed that appellant's driver put his left turn signal on, crossed the dividing yellow lines, and began travelling east in one of the westbound lanes. A Pony Express van had been behind appellant's car for approximately one-half mile and the driver, assuming that appellant's car was going to turn left at the next driveway stayed in the eastbound lane and increased her speed to pass appellant's car. Although the evidence is somewhat conflicting regarding the next sequence of events, it appears that when the driver of the van saw a tractor trailer truck travelling west in the same westbound lane in which appellant's car was travelling east, she let off the gas in an attempt to give appellant's car room to move back into the eastbound lane; however, upon realizing that a collision between appellant's car and the truck was imminent, she pulled onto the shoulder and went down an embankment. Appellant's car collided with the truck in the westbound lane, killing appellant's driver and injuring appellant. Appellant brought a lawsuit against the estate of the driver of the car in which she was a passenger, the driver of the tractor trailer truck and his employer, the driver of the Pony Express van, Pony Express and its insurer. Before the conclusion of the trial, appellant reached a settlement with all defendants except Pony Express, its driver and insurer. When the jury was unable to reach a verdict, the court declared a mistrial.
1. In her first two enumerations of error, appellant contends that the trial court erred in granting appellees' motion for judgment notwithstanding the mistrial. Georgia Power Co. v. Purser, 152 Ga.App. 181, 182, 262 S.E.2d 473 (1979). Appellant contends that the evidence is conflicting as to the sequence of events which occurred after appellant's car crossed the double yellow lines into the westbound lane. An accident reconstructionist testified that in his opinion there was a slight impact between appellant's car and the Pony Express van when appellant's car tried to reenter the eastbound lane. He also testified that but for the presence of the Pony Express van, appellant's car would have been able to reenter the eastbound lane and the collision between appellant's car and the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Braun v. Soldier of Fortune Magazine, Inc.
...that a legal duty exists, it generally leaves for the jury issues of negligence and proximate cause. Hogan v. Pony Exp. Courier Corp., 195 Ga.App. 592, 394 S.E.2d 391, 392 (1990). The district court found that publishers like SOF have a duty to the public when they publish an advertisement ......
-
Hambrick v. Makuch
...party opposing the motion. Lolmaugh v. T.O.C. Retail, 210 Ga.App. 605, 606, 436 S.E.2d 708 [ (1993) ]; Hogan v. Pony Express Courier Corp., 195 Ga.App. 592, 394 S.E.2d 391 [ (1990) ]." (Emphasis supplied.) Cox v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co., 217 Ga.App. 796, 459 S.E.2d 446 (1995); see al......
-
Harrison v. Jenkins
...300, 471 S.E.2d 256 (1996); Lolmaugh v. T.O.C. Retail, 210 Ga.App. 605, 606(1), 436 S.E.2d 708 (1993); Hogan v. Pony Express Courier Corp., 195 Ga.App. 592(1), 394 S.E.2d 391 (1990). 2. (Punctuation omitted.) Dietz v. Becker, 209 Ga.App. 678, 679(2), 434 S.E.2d 103 (1993). See OCGA §§ 51-12......
-
Johnson v. Ray, s. A92A1500
...Therefore, the trial court correctly ruled that the last clear chance doctrine was inapplicable." Hogan v. Pony Express Courier Corp., 195 Ga.App. 592, 593(3), 394 S.E.2d 391 (1990). 3. Appellants argue that the court erred by refusing to give their requested charge that a prior inconsisten......