Tanguay v. State Bd. of Publicroads

• Decision Date: 02 July 1924
• Docket Number: No. 415.,415.
• Citation: 125 A. 293
• Parties: TANGUAY v. STATE BOARD OF PUBLICROADS.
• Court: Rhode Island Supreme Court

125 A. 293

TANGUAY

v. STATE BOARD OF PUBLICROADS.

No. 415.

Supreme Court of Rhode Island.

July 2, 1924.

Appeal from Superior Court, Providence & Bristol Counties; Chester W. Barrows, Judge.

Proceeding by Henri C. Tanguay against the State Board of Public Roads. Prom a decree affirming an order of the Board, revoking plaintiff's license to operate a motor vehicle, plaintiff appeals. Appeal sustained.

Eugene L. Jalbert and Raphael L. Daignault, both of Woonsocket, for appellant.

Herbert L. Carpenter, Atty. Gen., for respondent.

RATHBUN, J. This is an appeal from a decree of the superior court affirming an order, entered by the state board of public roads, revoking the appellant's license to operate a motor vehicle on the public highways.

While the appellant was operating an automobile upon one of the public highways of the state, said automobile collided with a child who died as a result of the collision. When notice of the accident and death of the child was brought to the attention of the board it immediately suspended the appellant's said license and after receiving and considering a report made by one of the board's examiners who investigated the accident notified the appellant that it had, in accordance with the provisions of section 26, c. 1354, Public Laws 1916, entered an order revoking his license to operate motor vehicles upon the public highways. Said section 26 provides in part as follows:

"Whenever the death of any person results from any such accident, the board may forthwith suspend the license of the operator of the motor vehicle involved in such accident, and such license shall forthwith be delivered to it; and the board shall enter an order revoking such license unless, upon investigation or after a hearing, it shall find that the accident occurred without serious fault upon the part of such operator."

Before entering said order the board received no legal evidence, but based the finding that the appellant was not without serious fault solely upon the report made by the examiners sent out by the board to investigate the facts relative to the accident.

'the appellant contends that the order revoking his license is invalid because the finding that he was guilty of serious fault which contributed to the accident was made without giving him an opportunity to be heard. In passing upon this contention it will be necessary to consider the provisions of said section 26 which the board relies upon as authority for its action. The language above quoted from said section is not as clear and explicit as could be desired. If this section is considered without reference to other sections of the act it might be urged with considerable force that it was the intention of the Legislature to provide that whenever a motor vehicle is involved in an accident resulting in a death the board has authority to revoke the operator's license, after making an investigation, without first giving such operator an opportunity to be heard on the question whether he was guilty of serious fault which contributed to the accident. The statute does not...