Steiner v. Muldrew, (CC 491)

• Decision Date: 27 March 1934
• Docket Number: (CC 491)
• Citation: 114 W.Va. 801
• Court: West Virginia Supreme Court
• Parties: Daniel j. Steiner v. Okey L. Muldrew

114 W.Va. 801

Daniel j. Steiner

v.Okey L. Muldrew

(CC 491)

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Submitted February 27, 1934.

Decided March 27, 1934.

1. Actions

The violation of a statute, intended for the protection of persons of a certain class, cannot be the basis of a cause of action on the part of persons not belonging to the class intended to be protected by the statute.

2. Automobiles

The act of an adult guest passenger in an automobile that had been stopped on a dangerous curve in violation of a statute, in going to the rear of the automobile to remove a tire constitutes an independent act of negligence on the part of such guest passenger for which the host driver is not liable, even though the act of the guest passenger was done at his request.

Case certified from Circuit Court, Brooke County.

Action by Daniel J. Steiner against Okey L. Muldrew. A demurrer to the declaration was overruled as was a demurrer to the defendant's special plea No. 1, and on the joint motion of plaintiff and defendant the rulings were certified for review.

Reversed and remanded.

Ramsay & Wilkin, for plaintiff.

McCamic & Clarke, for defendant.

Kenna, Judge:

Daniel J. Steiner brought this action of trespass on the case against Okey L. Muldrew in the circuit court of Brooke County. A demurrer to the declaration was overruled as was a demurrer to defendant's special plea No. 1, and, on the joint motion of plaintiff and defendant, the circuit court of Brooke County certified to this court the sufficiency of the pleadings in question.

The declaration avers that on May 1, 1930, the defendant was driving an automobile owned by him in which the plaintiff was an invited guest along a road known as the SteubenvillePittsburgh Pike in Washington County, Pennsylvania, outside of a business or residential district; that that part of the road over which they were traveling was of brick construction with many dangerous curves and turns; that a statute of the state of Pennsylvania, set forth verbatim in the declaration, made it unlawful to park or leave any vehicle standing unless a clear and unobstructed width of not less than fifteen feet upon the main traveled portion of the highway opposite such standing vehicle should be left free for the passage of other vehicles, and unless a clear view of such standing vehicle might be obtained for a distance of 200 feet in each direction upon said highway; that the defendant owed the plaintiff the duty of not violating that statutory provision, and that, regardless of that duty, defendant stopped and parked his car on the highway at a point where there was not a clear or unobstructed width of not less than fifteen feet and where there was not a clear view of his automobile for a distance of 200 feet in each direction; that having so stopped his automo- bile, the defendant ordered the plaintiff to remove a tire from the rear thereof, and that plaintiff was obeying that order when a car driven by Mabel M. Nelson in the same direction in which the defendant's automobile was faced, crashed into the defendant's automobile pinning the plaintiff between the two cars and injuring him permanently.

The statute of the state of Pennsylvania that is invoked by this declaration is intended for the safety and benefit of persons traveling the public highways...