Transcon. Ins. Co. v. Daniels
| Decision Date | 03 April 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 104.,104. |
| Parties | TRANSCONTINENTAL INS. CO. et al. v. DANIELS et al. |
| Court | Michigan Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Circuit Court, Kent County; Leonard D. Verdier, Judge.
Action by Transcontinental Insurance Company and another against Travers Daniels, Jr., and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal.
Affirmed, and cause remanded for correction of judgment.
Argued before the Entire Bench.
Mason, Alexander, McCaslin & Cholette, of Grand Rapids (Miller & Hubbell, of Utica, N. Y., of counsel), for appellants.
Smith, Searl & Strawhecker, of Grand Rapids, for appellees.
Plaintiffs had judgment on trial before the court without a jury for negligent injuries to Cummins' truck. The question is whether, as a matter of law, the truck driver's negligence contributed to the injury.
Cummins' truck was 32 feet long, a loaded furniture van, and weighed 7 or 8 tons. The statutory speed limit for such vehicles is 20 miles per hour. It was running at 25 to 30 miles per hour. Therefore, the driver was guilty of negligence. The court held, however, that the negligence did not contribute to the injury.
Defendant Daniels was driving a Ford sedan and had followed the truck for several miles, awaiting an opportunity to pass. The day was snowy and stormy and the pavement was covered with icy slush. The edge of the pavement was obscured in places so it could not be seen. The truck was running on its own right side of the road. The Ford passed the truck on the left but, as it turned back toward the right, it began to skid, zigzagged back and forth in front of the truck, out of control, and finally ran off the pavement on the right side and overturned. When the car first skidded to the right it passed within 4 or 5 feet of the truck. The truck driver applied his brakes and turned to the left side of the pavement to pass the Ford. The left wheel of the truck ran off the pavement upon the shoulder, which was soft; the driver lost control, and the truck collided with a tree 8 feet from the pavement.
The facts render it evident that it cannot be said, as a matter of law, that, had the truck been running at the lawful rate of 20 miles per hour, the driver could have stopped without striking the sedan, or that he would not have driven on the soft shoulder, or that he would or could have handled the truck any differently than he did to avoid a collision. It was a question of fact found against defendants.
After...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Alley v. Klotz
...recovery. Arvo v. Delta Hardware Co., 231 Mich. 488, 204 N.W. 134;Reid v. Coon, 243 Mich. 37, 219 N.W. 613;Transcontinental Ins. Co. v. Daniels, 266 Mich. 562, 254 N.W. 205;Fitzcharles v. Mayer, 284 Mich. 122, 278 N.W. 788;Waling v. City of Detroit, 308 Mich. 163, 13 N.W.2d 246. Under the t......
-
Socony Vacuum Oil Co. v. Marvin
...a party of redress because of his own illegal conduct, the illegality must have contributed to the injury.” In Transcontinental Ins. Co. v. Daniels, 266 Mich. 562, 254 N.W. 205, the facts were analogous to those in the case at bar. There plaintiff's truck was driven at a rate of speed in ex......
- Wutzke v. Cnty. Fire Ins. Co. of Phila.