Pinckard v. Pease

Decision Date08 April 1921
Docket Number16273.
CitationPinckard v. Pease, 115 Wash. 282, 197 P. 49 (Wash. 1921)
CourtWashington Supreme Court
PartiesPINCKARD v. PEASE et al.

Department 1.

Appeal from Superior Court, Kittitas County; John Truax, Judge.

Action by R. R. Pinckard against Edgar Pease and others. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Reversed, and action dismissed.

Preston Thorgremson & Turner, of Seattle, for appellants.

Kern &amp Henton, of Ellensburg, for respondent.

MACKINTOSH J.

This is an action for personal injuries tried to the court without a jury, with judgment for the plaintiff.

The occurrence was as follows: On the morning of November 3 1919, Rebecca L. Pease, now deceased, the wife of the defendant Edgar Pease, and mother of defendant Hugh Pease, lay critically ill at the Pease home, some 5 miles west of Ellensburg. Her condition was such that both the defendants were doubtful whether she would survive until a doctor could come from Ellensburg to her bedside. The telephone service being interrupted, the defendant Hugh Pease, a man of about 35 years of age, was asked by his father to take their automobile and go to Ellensburg and get the respondent, a physician practicing there, and bring him to the home. Hugh Pease drove to Ellensburg and did not find the doctor at home, but learned that he was expected at the hospital at 8 o'clock, where Pease went and awaited him. The doctor arrived in a few minutes, and, after arranging for the post-ponement of an operation he was to perform, came out of the hospital to the front thereof, where his own and the Pease automobiles were standing. The plaintiff, thinking that the trip could be made more quickly by getting in the defendant's car, took his place beside the defendant Hugh Pease on the front seat, and they started on the trip. It was snowing and about an inch of snow lay on the ground. There were no chains on the car, and the plaintiff made no suggestion that they be put on. He testified, in fact, 'I would not have stopped to put on chains on my car had I been driving it.' From the edge of town to the place of the accident is a distance of about 2 miles. The last mile before reaching the scene of the accident was a straight and hard-surfaced road, and over this road the plaintiff testified the car went from 30 to 35 miles an hour. At the end of this straight road was a curve leading to the approach of a bridge, and after this curve had been partly turned the car skidded and went through the railing, and the accident occurred which resulted in the plaintiff's injury.

The respondent's complaint is that Hugh Pease failed to slow down quickly enough for the turn and that this was negligence. The testimony is that as the curve was being entered the driver of the car applied the brakes, but, the road being more slippery than he had judged it to be, the speed of the car was not lessened as much as he had anticipated, although lessened to a considerable extent. Under the circumstances of the situation, it cannot be said that the car, going at the rate of speed which was testified to until it reached the point near the place of the accident was being driven in a reckless or careless manner. In fact, the respondent frankly stated in his testimony that----

'Q. I understood you to say he drove the car well and you had no criticism of his driving except that he didn't put on the brake as quickly as you would have put on the brake as he approached the bridge? A. Yes. If I remember correctly, he made the remark that it was awfully slippery and he would have to drive carefully, and I answered him with the remark that he was driving very nicely or something of the kind. * * * Q. Your idea was that as he approached this curve that he made a mistake of judgment in not slowing down quite soon enough? A. I certainly think he did. * * * Q. You don't think he had any intention but to be careful. A. No; not in the least. Q. You were both anxious to get there? A. Yes. Q. As a matter of fact doctors who care for the
...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
13 cases
  • Colwell v. Bothwell
    • United States
    • Idaho Supreme Court
    • 13 Marzo 1939
    ... ... of itself does not show negligence (Simpson v ... Jones, 284 Pa. 596, 131 A. 541; Pinckard v ... Pease, 115 Wash. 282, 197 P. 49; Moir v. Hart, ... 189 Ill.App. 566; Smith v. Levison, 222 A.D. 310, ... 226 N.Y.S. 311); some that as a ... ...
  • Cannon v. Oregon Moline Plow Co.
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • 8 Abril 1921
  • Paddock v. Tone
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • 6 Septiembre 1946
    ... ... In the ... case last cited, we quoted from the case of Pinckard v ... Pease, 115 Wash. 282, 197 P. 49, 50, as follows: ... "Negligence ... is not a positive thing; it is to be ... ...
  • Heiman v. Kloizner
    • United States
    • Washington Supreme Court
    • 20 Julio 1926
    ... ... v. Buchanan, 91 Wash. 539, ... 158 P. 76; Smith v. Seattle School Dist. No. 1, 112 ... Wash. 64, 191 P. 858; Pinckard v. Pease, 115 Wash ... 282, 197 P. 49; Fleming v. Red Top Cab Co., 133 Wash ... 338, 233 P. 639. We do not mean by this that varying ... ...
  • Get Started for Free