Pearson v. Fountain
| Decision Date | 25 August 1966 |
| Docket Number | 6 Div. 253 |
| Parties | Newton PEARSON v. Jesse Lee FOUNTAIN et al. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Brobston & Brobston, Bessemer, for appellant.
London, Yancey, Clark & Allen, Birmingham, and Ling & Bains, Bessemer, for appellees.
This is an appeal from a judgment in favor of the defendants, Deaton Truck Lines, Inc., and Jesse Lee Fountain, driver of a Deaton truck.
The case was submitted to the jury on one count charging negligence to defendants in injuring the plaintiff in an intersection collision.
In the trial below, the plaintiff testified that on the night of the collision he was returning to his home after having completed his work shift at midnight.
His usual route home, and the one he was following at the time of the collision necessitated crossing the Birmingham-Bessemer super highway at the point such highway is intersected by Wilkes Road. The flow of traffic at this intersection is regulated by a traffic light.
The plaintiff testified that he approached the intersection while driving on Wilkes Road. The light turned green in his favor when he was about fifty feet from the intersection, and he reduced his speed to about fifteen or twenty miles per hour. Prior to entering the intersection, he observed a car halted to his left on the highway in the right lane from Birmingham. He did not see defendant's truck, nor did he remember anything about the impact.
On cross examination the plaintiff testified that there was nothing to obstruct his view of traffic approaching the intersection on the highway other than a telephone booth near the corner. He entered the intersection at about fifteen miles per hour, and could have stopped his vehicle in about ten feet.
The traffic light facing him changed directly from red to green, but he was not sure there was an amber light in the sequence.
Later, on recall for further cross examination, the plaintiff testified that he had entered the highway from Wilkes Road probably fifteen hundred times since the traffic light had been placed there. He knew that the intersection was a dangerous one. He generally tried to time his arrival at the intersection with the light and a few times had tried to time his entry onto the highway just as the light would turn green. On the occasion of the collision he had tried to time his entry onto the highway at just the time the light turned green.
Milton Lester, a police officer of the City of Midfield, testified that he investigated the collision as a result of a call he received at around 12:25 A.M., arriving there within one minute of the call. The highway is illuminated with street lights staggered on either side, and is well lighted. The traffic light at the intersection changes, both as to the highway and Wilkes Road, from green to amber to red, and then directly from red to green.
Robert Plan testified that on the night of the collision in question he was driving toward Birmingham on the highway. As he approached the intersection where the collision occurred, the traffic light turned red against him when he was about fifty yards from the intersection. He began applying his brakes and just as he stopped at the intersection, he heard the noise of a collision. He had not noticed either of the vehicles involved in the collision or any other vehicle in the area since he was watching the traffic light.
The defendant, Jesse Lee Fountain, testified that on the occasion of the collision he was employed as a driver by Deaton. He had been driving tractor-trailer trucks similar to the one involved in the collision for sixteen years.
Before setting out on his trip on the night of the collision, he spent about an hour inspecting his truck to be sure that the brakes, lights, horn, air in tires, etc., were in proper condition.
On the night in question, he was hauling 35,000 pounds of flat steel on the trailer. At thirty miles per hour, on a dry surface as was the road at the time of the collision, it would take approximately a distance of one hundred feet to stop the truck.
As he approached the collision site driving on the highway, his speed was twenty to twenty-five miles per hour. The light was green in his favor. When he got within thirty-five to forty feet of the light, it changed to caution. He applied his brakes gradually as a sudden stop would propel the load of steel through the cab. Fountain further testified that when about six feet from the light, the appellant's vehicle darted in front of him. He then applied all brakes, and swerved to the left to avoid a collision. Nevertheless, his truck collided with appellant's vehicle. His truck stopped within three inches after the impact.
On cross examination, Fountain testified that he had applied his brakes gradually, but was not trying to stop, but was slowing down to avoid an accident if anyone came into the intersection 'because I had enough time on the amber light to stop, before I got into the intersection, if there was anything coming.' There was nothing to obscure his vision of Wilkes Road but he did not see appellant's vehicle until it was in front of him.
We think the evidence reveals a situation where both drivers were more concerned with an entry into the intersection on a split second timing articulated with the traffic signal than with observing the possibility of other vehicles entering the intersection.
Appellant's assignment of errors 1 through 8 raise in various ways the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict and judgment....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Horton v. Mobile Cab & Baggage Co.
...The charge correctly stated a general legal principle. Karpeles v. City Ice Delivery Co., 198 Ala. 449, 73 So. 642; Pearson v. Fountain, 280 Ala. 1, 189 So.2d 551. While Charge 10 may have possessed misleading tendencies because of absence of correlated principles, such as that the presumpt......
-
Walker v. Ergon Trucking, Inc., Civil Action No. 1:18-cv-594-ACA
...owe each other a "general duty to operate an automobile with careful and prudent regard for the safety of others." Pearson v. Fountain, 189 So. 2d 551, 553 (Ala. 1966) (citation omitted). But "there is no duty imposed as a matter of law" on a driver approaching an intersection "to keep a sp......
-
Walker v. Ergon Trucking, Inc.
...... lookout for other vehicles when a driver is observing the. rules relating to traffic signals." Pearson v. Fountain, 189 So.2d 551, 553 (Ala. 1966). Beyond that,. in certain circumstances a violation of a statute or an. ordinance can ......
-
Coosa Valley Bank v. Taylor-Holmes Indus. Supply, Inc.
...judgments by the trial court's denying motions for new trial, judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and remittitur. Pearson v. Fountain, 280 Ala. 1, 189 So.2d 551 (1966); Smart v. Wambles, 271 Ala. 651, 127 So.2d 611 The posture of this case on appeal is placed in perspective by the followi......