Roberts v. McCall
| Decision Date | 24 February 1944 |
| Docket Number | 4 Div. 327. |
| Citation | 245 Ala. 359,17 So.2d 159 |
| Parties | ROBERTS v. McCALL |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied March 23, 1944.
E.O. Baldwin, of Andalusia, for appellant.
Jas A. Mulkey, of Geneva, and Murphy & Cook, of Andalusia for appellee.
The questions on this appeal relate to refused charges requested by defendant and rulings on evidence in a damage suit wherein appellee recovered a judgment against appellant for personal injuries received in the collision of a truck which plaintiff was driving with an automobile which defendant was driving.
The collision occurred at the junction of two public roads in Covington County. Both were paved highways. One was from Florala, and the other from Samson. The Samsan road joined the Florala road forming one from there toward Opp. There was a curve in the Samson road, but looking toward the junction it was said to be visible one hundred and fifty to two hundred feet.
Plaintiff was on the Samson road, past the crest of the curve and on his right side as he approached the junction. They agree that defendant was approaching from Opp, and as he neared the junction he turned to his left to cross the road, and the right front of his car collided with the left front of the truck as they both had left the road on plaintiff's right and on defendant's left.
Plaintiff claimed that defendant drove across the road in front of plaintiff's truck, which he then pulled off to his right, and the collision then occurred.
Defendant claimed that when he first saw the truck, he had turned off the road to look at some lumber, and was then about two or three feet off the road to his left. That when he turned to his left he did not see plaintiff's truck or any other car on the Samson road; that he then turned and went straight across the road. That he reckons he was two feet off the blacktop when he saw plaintiff coming: that he kept driving but plaintiff "came in and hit me." When defendant claims to have turned off the Florala road near the junction, he could see down the Samson road for one hundred and fifty to two hundred feet, as shown by a drawing which he introduced, and other evidence.
The different contentions raise a sharp issue of fact. If defendant negligently turned in front of plaintiff's truck in dangerous proximity to its approach proximately causing the collision, a claim of negligence on count 1 was available to plaintiff. If defendant was conscious of the danger, either saw plaintiff as he approached, or knew that someone was likely thus to approach, and he heedlessly and recklessly disregarded the danger and turned across the road in front of plaintiff's truck without looking to see if anyone was in a dangerous position at a time and place when he should have anticipated such a condition, and thereby proximately caused the collision, the claim of wanton injury in the second count was available to plaintiff.
The evidence justified such a finding by the jury, so that the affirmative charge as to each count was properly refused.
Refused...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
McLaney v. Turner
...259 Ala. 576, 67 So.2d 832; Tyler v. Drennen, 255 Ala. 377, 51 So.2d 516; Buchanan v. Vaughn, 260 Ala. 482, 71 So.2d 56; Roberts v. McCall, 245 Ala. 359, 17 So.2d 159; Crocker v. Lee, 261 Ala. 439, 74 So.2d Assignments of error 28 and 29 charge error in the refusal of defendant's requested ......
-
Browning v. Shackelford, 44255
...Frith v. Studdard, 267 Ala. 315, 101 So.2d 305 (1958); Ditsch v. Baggett Transp. Co., 258 Ala. 26, 61 So.2d 98 (1952); Roberts v. McCall, 245 Ala. 359, 17 So.2d 159 (1944). The Alabama court has further held that violation of the statute regulating speed does not constitute negligence as a ......
-
Tyler v. Drennen
...and with indifference to consequences turned her car to the left across the highway and thereby caused the accident. Roberts v. McCall, 245 Ala. 359, 17 So.2d 159. Assignment 2. There was no error in giving charge 18. This charge is not at variance, as contended by appellant, with the gener......
-
Mobile City Lines v. Alexander
... ... 1 Div. 249.Supreme Court of AlabamaApril 10, 1947 ... [249 ... Ala. 108] ... [30 So.2d 5] ... Johnston, ... McCall & Johnston, of Mobile, for appellant ... [249 ... Ala. 109] Wm. G. Caffey, of Mobile, D. G Ewing, of ... Birmingham, and F. F. Windham, ... properly refused in that it makes contributory negligence a ... bar to the wanton count. Roberts v. McCall, 245 Ala ... 359, 17 So.2d 159 ... The ... trial court did not err in refusing Charge 5. This court has ... frequently held ... ...