Livesay v. State, 14675

Decision Date11 July 1980
Docket NumberNo. 14675,14675
Citation126 Ariz. 345,615 P.2d 642
PartiesHarriett Annlee LIVESAY, the surviving spouse of Joseph Otis Livesay, on her own behalf and for and on behalf of Jo Evelyn Livesay, Harry Douglas Livesay and John Otis Livesay, the surviving children of Joseph Otis Livesay, and Anthony D. McCall, a single man, Appellants, v. STATE of Arizona, Arizona State Highway Department, Appellees.
CourtArizona Supreme Court

Langerman, Begam, Lewis, Leonard & Marks by Noel Fidel and Samuel Langerman, Phoenix, for appellants.

Robert K. Corbin, Atty. Gen. by William R. Jones, Jr., and Edward G. Hochuli, Sp. Asst. Attys. Gen., of Jones, Teilborg, Sanders, Haga & Parks, Phoenix, for appellees.

HAYS, Justice.

Appellants seek review of an adverse jury verdict in their negligence suit against defendant-appellee, the State of Arizona. Taking jurisdiction pursuant to 17A A.R.S. Civil Appellate Procedure Rules, rule 19(e), we affirm.

At 2:00 A.M. on the morning of July 20, 1973, an 18-wheel tractor-trailer, driven by Joseph Otis Livesay, proceeded west on U. S. 60 destined for Phoenix, Arizona. Approximately four miles east of the town of Superior, Route 60 begins a steep downhill grade. The incline continues until at least the Superior exit and is marked by signs warning of the impending hill and advising the use of lower gears in trucks.

Less than one-quarter of a mile east of the Superior boundary, the route-60 motorist must navigate a 1000 foot left-hand turn bordered on the south by rock formations sizable enough to obscure the road west of the curve from view. As the vehicle enters and negotiates the turn, the driver's perspective increases and upon partial completion, s/he is able to observe the entire road. U. S. 60, however, is unlighted, and the nighttime motorist is limited in vision to the scope of his or her headlights.

Several hundred feet west of the 1000-foot curve, U. S. 60 intersects with Arizona State Highway 177, an exit ramp flowing from the main highway to the right. Numerous signs located on the right shoulder of route 60 indicate the existence of the junction to a westbound traveller. Initially, there is a sign demonstrating with arrows that U. S. 60 continues straight while Arizona 177 parts to the right. This placard is visible prior to entering the 1000-foot curve. Approximately 200 feet further, another arrowed posting indicates that a motorist desiring either Superior or Kearny must turn to the right. Within two to three hundred feet of this information, another sign notes the eastern boundary of Superior, including specifics regarding the town's altitude and date of origin.

As the route 177 ramp exits the major thoroughfare, a standard speed limit sign reduced the permissible rate of travel to 25 m. p. h. This sign is approximately followed by an arrowed sign indicating the location of Highway 177 to the right. The exit ramp then arches sharply to the right. At the beginning of this curve, there is a "Stop Ahead" sign followed at the end of the turn by a stop sign at the intersection of the ramp and route 177.

For reasons not clearly established in the record, upon arrival at the Highway 177 junction, Mr. Livesay left route 60 and proceeded down the exit ramp. Exceeding the 25 m. p. h. speed limit, he continued around the curve, crossed route 177 and came to rest, overturned, against a dwelling located in an adjacent lot. Unfortunately, Mr. Livesay did not survive the accident, and suit for wrongful death was instituted against the State of Arizona by plaintiff-appellant, Harriett Livesay, his spouse, on behalf of herself and the Livesay children. Plaintiff-appellant, Anthony D. McCall, Mr. Livesay's companion driver and the sole passenger of the truck on the tragic evening, survived the accident, however sustained personal injuries and additionally initiated litigation. Both actions were subsequently consolidated for trial. A jury verdict in favor of the state has given rise to the instant appeal.

Appellant initially alleges as error the giving of the following charge to the jury:

The State of Arizona has a duty to design, construct, sign, mark and maintain its roadways in a condition which is reasonably safe for ordinary vehicular travel. (Emphasis added.)

It is appellant's contention that use of the term "ordinary" allowed the jury to draw...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Petefish By and Through Clancy v. Dawe
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • May 25, 1982
    ...error. See Woods v. Harker, 22 Ariz.App. 83, 523 P.2d 1320 (1974) (no perception of an emergency situation); Livesay v. State, 126 Ariz. 345, 615 P.2d 642 (1980) (emergency caused by the actor's own negligence); Dobbertin v. Johnson, 95 Ariz. 356, 390 P.2d 849 (1964) (no alternative courses......
  • Dunham v. Pima County
    • United States
    • Arizona Court of Appeals
    • February 25, 1988
    ...mark and maintain its roads and intersections in a condition which is reasonably safe for ordinary vehicular travel. Livesay v. State, 126 Ariz. 345, 615 P.2d 642 (1980); Arizona State Highway Department v. Bechtold, 105 Ariz. 125, 460 P.2d 179 (1969). "What is 'reasonably safe' takes into ......

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