Peterson v. De Luxe Cab Co.

Citation225 Iowa 809,281 N.W. 737
Decision Date18 October 1938
Docket NumberNo. 44462.,44462.
PartiesPETERSON v. DE LUXE CAB CO. et al.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Iowa

225 Iowa 809
281 N.W. 737

PETERSON
v.
DE LUXE CAB CO. et al.

No. 44462.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Oct. 18, 1938.


Appeal from District Court, Wapello County; George W. Dashiell, Judge.

This is an action at law for damages sustained by the plaintiff by reason of the plaintiff's eye coming in contact with the door of defendants' taxicab while the taxicab was stationary at the stand. Plaintiff relied upon the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur. Defendants filed a general denial. Cause was submitted to a jury, which returned a verdict in the amount of $1,900.70, in favor of the plaintiff. Defendants have appealed. Opinion states the facts.

Affirmed.

Jones & White, of Ottumwa, and Putnam, Putnam, Fillmore & Putnam, of Des Moines, for appellants.

Gilmore, Moon & Bannister, of Ottumwa, for appellee.


MITCHELL, Justice.

The De Luxe Cab Company was the owner and operator of a certain Pontiac motor car which was used as a taxicab and driven by Harold Smith.

Main Street in the city of Ottumwa runs east and west, and Green Street intersects it, running north and south. The taxicab stand was located just north of Main, on the east side of Green Street.

On the 12th day of September, 1936, at about the hour of five, H. E. Peterson left his place of business at 211 East Main Street, and, observing that it was raining, decided to engage a taxicab to take him home. He walked to the corner of Main and Market, then turned and walked east along the north side of Main Street, intending to go to the cab stand of the De Luxe Cab Company, situated at the corner of Green and Main. When he reached Green Street he crossed the street on the north side of Main. He saw a cab about twenty or thirty feet north of Main, on Green Street, parked about a foot or a foot and a half away from the sidewalk, headed north. As Peterson was crossing he saw the driver come from the cab stand and get into the car. Peterson walked along the sidewalk towards the cab, and, as he approached the cab he stooped to get the driver's attention. It was raining at the time and the car windows were partly steamed. As Peterson stooped he saw the driver in the seat and greated him with the words, “Hello, Bill!” The front door of the right side of the cab opened and the door came in contact with Peterson's glasses, breaking them and striking his eye. As a result of this accident he lost the sight of his eye. The undisputed record shows that Peterson did not touch the door knob or have his hand on the door. Peterson commenced this lawsuit against the taxicab company, asking for damages in the amount of $25,000. The case was submitted to a jury, which returned a verdict in the

[281 N.W. 738]

sum of $1,900.70. The taxicab company being dissatisfied, has appealed.

I. It is claimed that the court erred in not sustaining the appellants' motion for a directed verdict.

Appellants offered no evidence. The case was submitted to the jury on a doctrine of res ipsa loquitur, and, whether that doctrine applies is the main question argued.

[1] In their...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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