Mitchell v. Allied Cab Company, 1981.
| Decision Date | 24 June 1957 |
| Docket Number | No. 1982.,No. 1981.,1981.,1982. |
| Citation | 133 A.2d 477 |
| Parties | Ida Mae MITCHELL, Appellant, v. ALLIED CAB COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee. Forrest MITCHELL and American Fidelity Fire Insurance Company, Appellants, v. ALLIED CAB COMPANY, a corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | D.C. Court of Appeals |
Edward J. Skeens, Washington, D. C., and Leo Michael Linehan, for appellants.
Before HOOD and QUINN, Associate Judges, and CAYTON (Chief Judge, Retired) sitting by designation under Code, § 11-776(b).
Ida Mae Mitchell sued Allied Cab Company for personal injuries sustained in an automobile collision at an intersection. Her husband filed a separate suit for property damage and personal injuries, in which his insurance carrier joined as subrogee under a deductible policy. These cases were consolidated for jury trial. At the conclusion of all the evidence Allied moved for a directed verdict,1 which was denied as to the Mitchells but granted as to the insurance company, on the ground that it had failed to sustain the burden of proof of showing that the amount allegedly paid by it was rendered necessary by the collision. The jury returned a verdict for $1,500 in favor of Mrs. Mitchell and awarded her husband $500. Thereupon, Allied moved for judgment non obstante veredicto and also moved for a new trial. The trial court held in effect that Mrs. Mitchell was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law on the authority of Brown v. Clancy, 1945, D.C.Mun.App., 43 A.2d 296, and consequently granted Allied's motion for judgment, and also granted the motion for a new trial in the event that its decision on the motion for judgment be reversed on appeal. These appeals followed.
The facts are these: On May 7, 1954, late in the afternoon, the Mitchells, accompanied by a friend, left Charleston, South Carolina, for New York State, planning to take turns driving. At the time of the collision, which happened at approximately 5:55 A.M. the next morning, Mrs. Mitchell was driving, the woman passenger was on the front seat with her, and Mr. Mitchell was asleep in the rear. The weather was clear and the road surface dry. Mrs. Mitchell testified that she had never driven in the District of Columbia before; that she was traveling north on First Street, N. W., near the intersection of Louisiana Avenue when she realized she had made a wrong turn, and that she was endeavoring to get back on the proper route when she noticed a flashing red signal,2 which she later ascertained was located at the corner of Louisiana Avenue at First Street; that she stopped her car about four feet from the south curb line preparatory to making a right turn and had an unobstructed view to her left "well enough to see a vehicle approaching that corner." The passenger also had a view for an even greater distance and she testified that she could see for "about a block, maybe, or a block and a half." Both testified that they saw no vehicle traveling northeast on Louisiana Avenue, the favored street, and therefore did not see the taxicab until after the collision. The only evidence of any explanation of the collision by Mrs. Mitchell was "The first thing jumped in my mind was a plane, because it sounded as if it had showered over the top." "* * * it sounded like it had hit the top of the car." According to her testimony she had just started to turn on Louisiana Avenue and had traveled but a very few feet when the collision occurred, the taxicab hitting the left rear and side of her automobile.
The taxicab driver's testimony was that he was traveling about 25 miles per hour in a northeasterly direction on Louisiana Avenue, which was controlled by a flashing yellow light,3 when he saw the Mitchell vehicle as it was about to enter the intersection; in his opinion it was traveling 30 miles per hour:...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Phillips v. D. C. Transit System., Inc.
...conclusion may be drawn, the issue becomes one of law for the court. Hardy v. Hardy, D.C. App., 197 A.2d 923; Mitchell v. Allied Cab Company, D.C.Mun.App., 133 A.2d 477, 479; Brown v. Clancy, D.C.Mun.App., 43 A.2d 296, Even if we assume there was primary negligence on the part of the bus dr......
-
Spain v. McNeal
...shows was there to be seen. See, e. g., Singer v. Doyle, supra; Sims v. East Washington Railway Co., supra; Mitchell v. Allied Cab Co., D.C.Mun. App., 133 A.2d 477 (1957); Brown v. Clancy, D.C.Mun.App., 43 A.2d 296 (1945). However, the cases in this jurisdiction in which contributory neglig......
-
Reading v. Faucon, 1985.
...law only when there is but one reasonable inference which may be drawn from undisputed facts.1 In the recent case of Mitchell v. Allied Cab Co., D.C.Mun.App., 133 A.2d 477, and in the earlier case of Brown v. Clancy, D.C. Mun.App., 43 A.2d 296, we held there was contributory negligence as a......
-
Holmes v. Stahl
...110 A.2d 690; McKnight v. Bradshaw. D. C.Mun.App., 90 A.2d 825; Lewis v. Shiffers, D.C.Mun.App., 67 A.2d 269; cf. Mitchell v. Allied Cab Co., D.C.Mun.App., 133 A.2d 477. 2. Gober v. Yellow Cab Company of D. C., Inc., D.C.Mun.App., 173 A.2d 915. 3. Shu v. Basinger, D.C.Mun.App., 57 A. 2d 295......