Mayor of Balt. v. Kennon
| Decision Date | 15 February 2023 |
| Docket Number | 554-2022 |
| Parties | MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL OF BALTIMORE v. AMADIHE KENNON |
| Court | Court of Special Appeals of Maryland |
Circuit Court for Baltimore City Case No. 24-C-20-005239
Graeff, Albright, Raker, Irma S. (Senior Judge, Specially Assigned), JJ.
After a traffic collision with police officer's cruiser, Amadihe Kennon, Appellee, filed a negligence suit against the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore (collectively, the "City"), Appellants, in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.[1] After a three-day jury trial, the circuit court granted Mr. Kennon's motion for judgment on the issue of liability under Maryland Rule 2-519.[2] In so doing, the circuit court held that the officer involved in the collision was negligent and Mr. Kennon was not contributorily negligent, both as a matter of law. The case then reached the jury solely on the issue of Mr. Kennon's damages.
After judgment was entered, the City noted a timely appeal, asking us to consider two questions. These we list in reverse order:
For the reasons below, we conclude that the circuit court did not err in granting Mr. Kennon's motion for judgment as to both the officer's negligence and Mr. Kennon's lack of contributory negligence. We will affirm the circuit court's judgment.
On the morning of February 5, 2019, Mr. Kennon was driving southbound on Perring Parkway near the intersection with Hillen Road in Baltimore, Maryland. The southbound direction of the parkway included three separate lanes: two dedicated travel lanes, and a third lane, where parking was authorized, that was abutted on its western side by a curb.[3] The two southbound travel lanes were to the east side of the curb lane.
Mr. Kennon was traveling southbound at approximately 35 miles per hour, which was the posted speed limit on Perring Parkway. As he was approaching the Hillen Road intersection, Mr. Kennon changed lanes to avoid traffic congestion, moving one lane to the west and entering the curb lane. As was usual at that time in the morning, the curb lane did not contain any parked cars. Mr. Kennon was thus able to proceed southbound in the curb lane without reducing his speed, as he had done several times before.
As Mr. Kennon neared the intersection with Hillen Road, however, Officer Hunter Helman, who had been proceeding northbound in a police cruiser, attempted to turn west onto Hillen Road.[4] That maneuver required Officer Helman to cross all three lanes on the southbound side of the parkway, and then proceed onto Hillen Road further to the west. While Officer Helman was completing this turn (and driving roughly perpendicularly across Mr. Kennon's southbound lane), his cruiser and Mr. Kennon's vehicle collided.
There were no stop signs or traffic signals at the intersection. The weather at the time was sunny and cold. Visually, the southbound curb lane in which Mr. Kennon was driving was paved in a lighter color of asphalt than Perring Parkway's other two southbound lanes. The curb lane was also somewhat narrower than the travel lanes, though it was wide enough for vehicles to drive. There were no painted dividing lines to visually separate the curb lane from the adjacent travel lane.[5] Both Mr. Kennon and Officer Helman were familiar with the intersection and had driven their respective routes before. Shortly before the intersection with Hillen Road, the grade of Perring Parkway in the southbound direction is downhill. Thus, drivers on Perring Parkway southbound begin to travel down an incline before reaching Hillen Road, and the incline does not return to level until after the Hillen Road intersection.
At the outset of the trial, the circuit court addressed several pending motions as to evidentiary issues, including Mr. Kennon's motions in limine concerning his speed and contributory negligence. As to these motions, Mr. Kennon argued that there was no evidence to contradict his testimony that he was traveling the posted speed limit and that his speed did not contribute to causing the collision. In response, the City indicated that it would not challenge Mr. Kennon's testimony regarding his speed, but asserted that it would nonetheless introduce some evidence that Mr. Kennon's speed, combined with his decision to proceed in the curb lane, was negligent and contributed to causing the collision. The circuit court denied Mr. Kennon's motions, reasoning that Mr. Kennon then asserted that there was no evidence to show that he contributed to causing the collision. In response, the circuit court reiterated that it would first hear the evidence before deciding whether any issue could reach the jury, and that it would not do so while ruling on Mr. Kennon's motions in limine:
But what I'm saying is, the evidence of the Plaintiff's speed[,] of which lane he was in, of which lane other cars were in, all of that is admissible as the circumstances of the accident. It may be admissible to show the Defendant's negligence, but whether that amounts to generating an issue of contributory negligence is not something I'm going to decide until I hear all the evidence.
Over a three-day jury trial, Mr. Kennon testified and called seven other witnesses. Of those witnesses, the only eyewitnesses to the collision were Officer Helman and Mr. Kennon himself.[6] The City did not call any witnesses. Mr. Kennon introduced several exhibits into evidence, but the majority of his exhibits were relevant only to the issue of damages. The City introduced several exhibits as well. Of those, the only exhibits relevant to an issue other than damages were photographs of the intersection where the collision occurred.[7]
Officer Helman testified that, before the accident, he was driving a Baltimore City Police Department cruiser that was owned by the City. He recalled that traffic in the curb lane of southbound Perring Parkway was flowing freely, while traffic was heavy in the other two lanes. At some point, traffic in the non-curb lanes stopped completely. Seeing a gap in the stopped cars, Office Helman began to make his turn onto Hillen Road, maneuvering his cruiser perpendicular to the flow of traffic on Perring Parkway and approaching the curb lane with the intent to cross over and complete his turn.
Before entering the curb lane, Officer Helman stopped his cruiser. He knew from his experience with the intersection that drivers on Perring Parkway sometimes used the curb lane as a travel lane in the morning, and he also remembered seeing "light traffic" in the curb lane while he was attempting to make his turn.[8] Thus, Officer Helman attempted to check for traffic before entering the curb lane, but his view was obstructed by the other vehicles on Perring Parkway, and he could not see Mr. Kennon's vehicle.[9] Despite not having a clear view, and appreciating the danger that another vehicle might be traveling in the curb lane, Officer Helman pulled into the curb lane. He immediately saw Mr. Kennon, but Officer Helman had no time to take evasive action to avoid a collision. All that Officer Helman could do was "brace for impact."
Mr. Kennon testified that, in the time before the collision, he was proceeding at a roughly constant speed of 35 miles per hour, i.e., the posted speed limit. He stated that he had maneuvered his vehicle into the curb lane about a half-mile before the intersection with Hillen Road, because the other two southbound lanes had heavier traffic. Mr. Kennon testified that, when he entered the curb lane, traffic in all three southbound lanes was moving at the same speed, and traffic was not moving more slowly in any one lane. He also recalled seeing other drivers ahead of him using the curb lane as a travel lane. He stated that, when no cars were parked in the curb lane, it was generally used as "a regular lane." By the time that Mr. Kennon reached the intersection with Hillen Road, however, the vehicles in the other two southbound lanes of Perring Parkway had stopped. Because Mr. Kennon's view was obstructed by those vehicles (just as Officer Helman's view was obstructed), Mr. Kennon could not see Officer Helman's cruiser until it entered Mr. Kennon's curb lane. Mr. Kennon testified that this occurred a "quarter second -- half second maybe before I ran into him." Mr. Kennon also said that he "probably tried to brake" as soon as he saw Officer Helman's cruiser enter his lane, but there was little time, and he did not "know for sure" whether he was able to apply his brakes before the collision.
At the conclusion of the evidence, Mr. Kennon moved for judgment on the issue of liability pursuant to Maryland Rule 2-519. He argued that, as a matter of law, the City was liable for negligence because Officer Helman negligently caused the collision, and Mr. Kennon was not contributorily negligent. The circuit court agreed, granting Mr. Kennon's motion and submitting only the issue of damages to the jury. In so doing, the circuit court summarized the undisputed evidence and concluded that Mr. Kennon had the right-of-way, Officer Helman was negligent, and Mr. Kennon was not contributorily negligent:
To continue reading
Request your trial