Miles v. Webb

Decision Date07 April 1932
Docket Number44.
Citation159 A. 782,162 Md. 269
PartiesMILES v. WEBB.
CourtMaryland Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, Worcester County; Joseph L. Bailey and Robert F. Duer, Judges.

Action by Jefferson Webb against Floyd Miles. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.

Reversed and new trial awarded.

Argued before BOND, C.J., and URNER, ADKINS, OFFUTT, DIGGES, PARKE and SLOAN, JJ.

James A. McAllister, of Cambridge, and Staton, Whaley & Price and William G. Kerbin, all of Snow Hill, for appellant.

George H. Myers, of Princess Anne, for appellee.

ADKINS J.

The plaintiff was injured as the result of a collision between his automobile and the truck of defendant. The truck was left by defendant's employee standing in the public road leading from Crisfield to Hopewell in Somerset county about 7:15 p. m. on September 12, 1930, without a rear light. A concessum in the case is that on that day the sun set at 6:12 p. m. The plaintiff's account of the accident is that as he rounded a corner in the road known as Mariner's corner he saw some lights coming down the road. "I kept my eyes on them until about the time I got to the truck and the lights blinded me and right after he (the driver of the car with the blinding lights) passed, the truck was so close on me I could not avoid the accident. I turned the wheels to the left trying to get out of it but it was just too close and the rear end of the truck hit my body on the right hand side crashing her in and throwing me out in the road." He further testified that his car was lighted; that, when the car he met had passed, he was about 90 feet from the truck but by the time his vision cleared he was about 40 feet away; that his rate of speed was between 30 and 40 miles an hour; that he was not driving very fast because he had slowed down at the corner; that his brakes were in good condition; that it was "pretty dark, may be a little redness in the west." One or more other witnesses testified that it was dark. It is conceded that the only lights on the truck were two small lights in front which were not reflected in the rear.

This appeal is from the judgment on a verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

The only exception to rulings on evidence was abandoned, so we are only concerned with the ruling on the prayers. Plaintiff's two prayers were granted and six of the defendant's. Plaintiff's second was a damage prayer to which no objection was urged in argument and to which none could be taken if there was any evidence to take the case to the jury. His first prayer instructed the jury that under the laws of Maryland every vehicle at rest on a public highway during the period from half hour after sunset to half hour before sunrise is required to display a light visible from the rear of said vehicle; and that, if the jury should find from the evidence that defendant's employees left the truck standing on the highway on the day of the accident at a time later than half an hour after sunset, without displaying a light on said truck visible from the rear thereof, such failure to display said light constituted negligence on the part of the defendant.

Section 540 of article 27 of the Code, on which the prayer is based in our opinion, has no reference to motor vehicles. It is a codification of sections 1 and 2, chapter 53 of the Acts of 1918. Therein it is expressly provided: "That nothing contained in this Act shall be construed as altering or affecting the obligation of the users of motor vehicles to display the lights required by the laws of this State relating to motor vehicles." (Section 3.) This act was approved on April 2, 1918. Five days earlier, on March 28, 1918, there was approved a general motor vehicle law designated as chapter 85 (Acts 1918); section 148 (3) of which provides as follows: "All motor vehicles in use on the public highways, excepting motorcycles, shall during the period of from one-half hour after sunset to one-half hour before sunrise, display two or more white or tinted lights, other than red, on the forward part of said vehicles, so placed as to be seen from the front, and of sufficient illuminating power to be visible at a distance of two hundred (200) feet in the direction in which displayed, and to reveal any person, vehicle or substantial object twenty-five feet ahead of the lamps, except when at rest it shall display at least one light, showing white to the front and red to the rear, carried to the left of the motor vehicle, visible...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Hardin v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 19, 1934
    ...316 Mo. 742; New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v. Iowa State Bank, 1 F.2d 196; Porter v. Greenbrier Quarry Co., 161 Md. 34, 155 A. 428; Miles v. Webb, 162 Md. 269, 159 A. 782. (5) Plaintiff's testimony as to the manner of his injury was not impossible or contrary to physical law or to the admitted fac......
  • Weaver v. Mobile & O. R. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 16, 1938
    ... ... 742; New Amsterdam Cas. Co. v ... Iowa State Bank, 1 F.2d 196; Porter v. Greenbrier ... Quarry Co., 161 Md. 34, 155 S.W. 428; Miles v ... Webb, 162 Md. 269, 159 A. 782. (c) Plaintiff's ... testimony as to his injury was not impossible or contrary to ... physical law or to the ... ...
  • Absolon v. Dollahite
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • August 27, 2003
    ...221 Md. 62, 65, 155 A.2d 698, 700 (1959); Ford v. Bradford, 213 Md. 534, 541, 132 A.2d 488, 491-492 (1957); Miles v. Webb, 162 Md. 269, 272, 159 A. 782, 784 (1932); Moura v. Randall, 119 Md.App. 632, 648, 705 A.2d 334, 342, cert. denied, 349 Md. 495, 709 A.2d 140 The defendants argued in th......
  • Robert v. Wells
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • May 18, 1936
    ... ... They had passed through Catonsville, and while proceeding at ... a rate of speed from 20 to 25 miles an hour, they suddenly ... saw in their path a parked truck, upon which there was at ... least no rear light, nor at that time were there any other ... rainy night without a rear light justified a finding of ... negligence. Likewise in Miles v. Webb, 162 Md. 269, ... 272, 159 A. 782, this court held in an action for injuries ... received when plaintiff's automobile collided with the ... rear ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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