Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Gee

Decision Date06 March 1939
Docket Number4-5398
Citation125 S.W.2d 802,197 Ark. 925
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeal from Nevada Circuit Court; Dexter Bush, Judge; affirmed if remittitur is entered.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded.

McRae & Tompkins and Bush & Bush, for appellants.

W. F. Denman, for appellee.



This action was instituted by appellee, Mrs. Grace Gee, against appellants, Railway Express Agency, Inc., and W. L. Hines, to recover damages for injury to Mrs. Gee. On the morning of February 24, 1938, Imon Gee, husband of appellee, had to make a business trip to Texarkana, and the appellee went with him to see Red River at Fulton while the river was at flood stage; they were in a small Ford coupe, and as they were leaving Prescott their car collided with a small truck driven by W. L. Hines, one of the appellants; neither of the cars was overturned; neither car was seriously damaged; the Gees drove away in their car, and Mrs. Gee did not see a doctor on the trip, but the next morning her arm was bruised and swollen about three inches above the elbow. The complaint alleged that Hines was an agent of the Railway Express Agency, Inc., and that he negligently and carelessly drove the truck into and against the car in which appellee was riding, seriously, painfully and permanently injuring her right arm, shoulder, neck and face to her damage in the sum of $ 25,000.

It was alleged that the driver of the truck failed to keep a lookout, failed to keep his truck under control, and operated it at a high, reckless and dangerous rate of speed.

The answer of the Railway Express Agency, Inc., denied the material allegations of the complaint, and pleaded contributory negligence; and Hines also filed answer denying the material allegations and pleading contributory negligence.

There was a verdict and judgment for $ 5,000, and the case is here on appeal.

The evidence tended to show that on the morning of February 24 1938, the appellee, with her husband left Prescott about 9:15 o'clock at the intersection of highway 67 and East Elm street; the evidence of appellee showed that they were crossing the street properly, on the proper side, and that the truck driven by Hines approached, and that at the time Hines was looking north over his shoulder. The truck struck the car in which appellee was riding and nearly turned it over; that Hines did not check his speed before the collision; that Hines said immediately after the collision: "I didn't see you before I hit you. I am sorry. Just as soon as I get through delivering this express I will come by the store and straighten it up." Appellee went on to Fulton, and later had the car repaired at a cost of $ 25.50. After the wreck, witnesses noticed in the back of Hines' truck a roll of something, looked like it might have been tires, and two boxes wrapped in brown paper; they looked like express packages. Gee did not discover that his wife was injured until while they were on the trip she complained and did not sleep any that night. The afternoon after the collision there were two black places as big as a tea-cup on her arm; she has suffered considerably since that time; cannot do her normal housework; the injury is worse than it was a few days ago; she does part of her housework, and her husband helps her do the work; Hines was driving his car at a high, reckless and dangerous rate of speed all the time. After the collision the coupe was sitting diagonally on the highway, just across the black line in the center; the collision did not so disable the coupe as to prevent the trip, and it did not prevent the appellee from going on the trip, although she complained all the time.

The appellee's testimony showed that they slowed up when they started into the intersection, and as they slowed up to make the turn the truck hit their car. Appellee thought Hines was going to stop or turn. The Gee car was in the intersection before the Hines truck; Mr. Hines was driving a half-ton Ford truck. When they saw Hines coming appellee held her hand out, but he was looking north, and he hit the appellee's car, and appellee's car did not hit his. Appellee testified at length about the pain and suffering caused by the injury to her arm; she does her own cooking with what little assistance her husband can render; makes up her beds, but her husband does most of the housework; Hines' truck was going about 20 miles an hour; appellee was treated by Dr. Hesterly, and afterwards went to Little Rock to see Dr. McGill; her arm troubles her all the time, and she has to take tablets to make her rest; arm and shoulder are steadily growing worse.

Beverly Johnson testified that he was not looking at the cars when the collision occurred, but the Hines car hit the Gee car; the Gee car was struck about the middle of the door; there was something in the bed of Hines' truck; little boxes of some kind; witness heard Mr. Hines tell Mr. Gee as soon as he got through delivering express he would come over to see him; does not know what was in the boxes in the truck; does not know whether Mr. Gee signaled a left turn or not.

Mr. Gee testified that he did signal a left turn as he drove into the intersection.

Mrs. Emma Sampson saw the collision and stated that Gee came straight into the intersection on the right side of the street and turned south toward Hope; she saw the Hines truck coming and saw he was going to hit the Gee car; Hines was looking back over his shoulder; was driving fast, and Gee was not driving fast; the front of Hines' truck hit the center of the Gee car; Hines had something in his truck which witness took to be car casings and three or four boxes wrapped in brown paper; Hines was looking north over his left shoulder, and the car was coming, as fast as he could drive.

Reece Marks testified that he saw Gee drive into the intersection; he got into the intersection before Hines did; the Gee car was hit about the center; saw some little boxes in Hines' truck; two or three of them.

Harvey Francis testified that he repaired the Gee car, and that the right door panel, the front and rear fenders and the running board were damaged, all on the right-hand side; the car had been struck about midship; the repair bill was $ 25.50.

Dr. J B. Hesterly testified that he was a practicing physician and surgeon, and that Mrs. Gee came to him in February, 1938, suffering from an injury to her right arm and shoulder; the injury to the arm was just above the elbow up to the shoulder; there was a broken blood vessel; thinks she had an injury to the radial nerve; the nerve extends up into the shoulder; an injury to this nerve could cause pain where the nerve goes; witness dressed the arm; appellee complained of pain which he attributed to pressure on the radial nerve. It is possible that scar tissue was left there which is causing the present trouble; the greater the scar tissue the greater would be the pain; attributes her pain to scar tissue resulting...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Temple Cotton Oil Co. v. Brown
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 23 October 1939
    ...v. Jones, 197 Ark. 767, 126 S.W.2d 99; Southwestern Transportation Co. v. Chambliss, 197 Ark. 865, 125 S.W.2d 123; Railroad Express Agency v. Gee, 197 Ark. 925, 125 S.W.2d 802; St. Louis, S. F. Ry. Co. v. Herndon, Ark., 129 S.W.2d 954; Lloyd v. James, Ark., 128 S.W.2d 1019; St. Louis Southw......
  • Temple Cotton Oil Co. v. Brown
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 23 October 1939
    ... ... Co. v. Chambliss, 197 ... Ark. 865, 125 S.W.2d 123; Ry. Express Agency v ... Gee, 197 Ark. 925, 125 S.W.2d 802; St. Louis-S. F ... ...
  • Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Snowden
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • 8 May 1961
    ...fix an amount with the conviction that there is no substantial evidence to support a larger amount. See Railway Express Agency, Inc. v. Gee, 197 Ark. 925, 125 S.W.2d 802; Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Barham, 198 Ark. 158, 128 S.W.2d 353; Coca Cola Bottling Company of Southeast Arkan......

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