Orme v. Farmer
| Decision Date | 18 September 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 16.,16. |
| Citation | 256 N.W. 470,268 Mich. 425 |
| Parties | ORME v. FARMER et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Genesee County; James S. Parker, Judge.
Action by Alex Orme against James Farmer, individually and doing business as La Salle 25 Cent Cab Company, and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Stewart A. Richard, of Detroit, for appellants.
Carton & Gault, of Flint (Matthew Davison, Jr., of Flint, of counsel), for appellee.
On October 11, 1931, at about 1:30 a. m., Alex Orme, plaintiff, was proceeding across North Saginaw street in the city of Flint, Mich. He was walking between two companions, with his arms interlocked with theirs as they left the curb near the intersection of Alma street. A slight mist was falling, and the pavement was wet, but there was sufficient visibility from the street lights so that a car or person could be seen almost a block away. Plaintiff claims that although he and his companions crossed at a diagonal, he looked in each direction before he stepped from the curb and that he looked again in like manner when he reached the double car line in the center of the street, but that neither time did he see defendant's car approaching; that shortly after he passed the center of the street he was struck by a cab, owned by James Farmer, and driven by Everett La Duke, both of whom are made defendants herein. There was testimony that plaintiff and his two companions narrowly escaped being run down by another car, just as they left the curb; that they had been drinking about four hours prior to the accident; that La Duke was only driving at the rate of 20 miles per hour; that his car was in good condition. He claimed that he was blinded by the lights of another car and did not see plaintiff until his car struck him. On the other hand, it was shown that the accident occurred at a time when the street was almost deserted; that one of plaintiff's companions saw the approaching car, as they were proceeding in a straight direction along a diagonal line; and that if La Duke had proceeded in a straight line without deflecting his car, he would not have struck plaintiff. La Duke admitted that he was not looking straight ahead just prior to the accident but had turned his head towards the occupants of the rear seat of the car while carrying on a conversation with them; also, that he had swerved the car to the side just before he str...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Trafamczak v. Anys
...to watch the road while endeavoring to pick up the ignition key that had fallen to the floor of the car. See, also, Orme v. Farmer, 268 Mich. 425, 256 N.W. 470;Breckenridge v. Arms, 279 Mich. 384, 272 N.W. 716;Dreyer v. Otter Tail Power Co., 205 Minn. 286, 285 N.W. 707,287 N.W. 13;Bashor v.......
-
Ware v. Nelson
...in question, was not guilty of any negligence which, in any way, contributed to or was a proximate cause of the accident.' Orme v. Farmer, 268 Mich. 425, 256 N.W. 470; Gapske v. Hatch, supra; 38 Am.Jur. Negligence, § 212; 65 C.J.S. Negligence § And the verdict fo the jury must be read as th......
-
Martin v. Leslie
...jury question.' 'See, also, Perkins v. Holser, 213 Mich. 579, 182 N.W. 49; Ottaway v. Gutman, 207 Mich. 393, 174 N.W. 127; Orme v. Farmer, 268 Mich. 425, 256 N.W. 470. 'In our opinion the question of whether or not plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence was a jury See, also, Pearce......
-
Krukowski v. Englehardt
...a jury question.’ See, also, Perkins v. Holser, 213 Mich. 579, 182 N.W. 49;Ottaway v. Gutman, 207 Mich. 393, 174 N.W. 127;Orme v. Farmer, 268 Mich. 425, 256 N.W. 470. In our opinion the question of whether or not plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence was a jury question. Nor are w......