Wildenhaim v. Knight, 7478.
| Decision Date | 20 June 1934 |
| Docket Number | No. 7478.,7478. |
| Parties | WILDENHAIM v. KNIGHT. |
| Court | Rhode Island Supreme Court |
Exceptions from Superior Court, Kent County; G. Frederick Frost, Judge.
Action by Hazel Wildenhaim against Frank H. Knight. Directed verdict for defendant, and plaintiff brings exception.
Exception overruled, and case remitted.
Bernard B. Abedon, Quinn, Kernan & Quinn, and Michael De Ciantis, all of Providence, for plaintiff.
Sherwood & Clifford and Raymond E. Jordan, all of Providence, for defendant.
This is an action on the case for negligence to recover damages resulting from a collision between two automobiles at the intersection of Potter avenue and Niagara street in the city of Providence. The case is here on the plaintiff's exception to the direction of a verdict for the defendant.
Potter avenue runs east and west and Niagara street north and south. Each highway is of macadam construction, 30 feet wide, with sidewalks 10 feet wide. The accident happened about 5:30 p. m. It was still daylight; the weather was clear and the road dry. The view of Potter avenue at this intersection is to some extent limited. A house on this corner is 16 feet and 8 inches from the curbline of Niagara street and 16 feet from the curbline of Potter avenue. In front of this house there is a hedge 3 feet and 6 inches high along the sidewalk, except at the corner where there is a small clump of hedge which is 4 feet and 6 inches high. Niagara street southerly from Potter avenue is straight for a considerable distance and northerly is straight for one block, where it ends. Potter avenue to the east is straight for a long distance; to the west it is straight for four or five hundred feet, where there is a slight turn to the right which does not, however, obstruct the view along Potter avenue.
The versions of the accident by the two witnesses for plaintiff and by the same number for defendant are contradictory and irreconcilable. Plaintiff's evidence is to the effect that she had stopped her automobile just before coming to Potter avenue; that she started ahead and, as she reached the corner, was driving slowly in second speed; that she looked to her left, saw defendant's automobile some 75 feet away, approaching at a speed estimated to be between 35 and 40 miles an hour; that she drove into and proceeded about two-thirds of the way across Potter avenue when she again looked, saw the defendant's automobile near at hand and, thinking that an accident was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ries v. Cheyenne Cab & Transfer Company
... ... Hayes, (Mich.) 229 N.W. 430; Riley v. McNaugher, ... (Pa.) 178 A. 6; Wildenhaim v. Knight, (R. I.) ... 173 A. 83; Beattie v. Parkhurst, (Vt.) 163 A. 589; ... Johnson v ... ...
-
United Electric Rys. Co. v. Pa. Petroleum Products Co.
...v. Cambra, 51 R. I. 472, 155 A. 667; Labbee v. Frenze, 53 R. I. 168, 165 A. 217; Lane v. Beede, 54 R. I. 168, 171 A. 371; Wildenhaim v. Knight (R. I.) 173 A. 83. We have carefully examined these cases, and in our opinion they are all distinguishable on the facts from the one now before In C......
-
Dembicer v. Pawtucket Cabinet & Builders Finish Co., Inc.
...R.I. 447, 108 A. 653; Correia v. Cambra, 51 R.I. 472, 155 A. 667; Keenan v. Providence Journal Co., 52 R.I. 54, 157 A. 302; Wildenhaim v. Knight (R.I.) 173 A. 83. The Labbee Case, supra, is hereby limited and modified in so far as it is inconsistent with this No question of the last clear c......