Wright v. Bridges

Citation65 S.W.2d 265
PartiesWRIGHT v. BRIDGES et al.
Decision Date05 August 1933
CourtSupreme Court of Tennessee

Z. T. Carney, of Shelbyville, and James D. Richardson, of Murfreesboro, for plaintiff in error Wright.

J. D. B. De Bow and Walker & Hooker, all of Nashville, for defendants in error J. W. Bridges et al.

CROWNOVER, Judge.

All of these actions were tried together, by consent, as they arose out of the same accident. The actions of Mrs. Bridges, Mrs. Higgason, and Mrs. Marshall are for damages for personal injuries as the result of the collision of the automobile in which they were riding with an automobile owned by defendant and driven by his agent. J. W. Bridges and J. I. Marshall sued for damages for loss of services and medical expenses of their wives. J. T. Higgason sued for loss of services and medical expenses of Mrs. Higgason and for damages for the destruction of his automobile.

The defendant pleaded not guilty, and asked leave of the court to file pleas of the statute of limitations, which the court declined to permit him to file.

The cases were tried by the judge and a jury. At the close of plaintiffs' evidence, and again at the conclusion of all the evidence, defendant moved the court for a directed verdict, which motions were by the court overruled.

The jury returned verdicts as follows: J. W. Bridges, $200; Bettie Mai Bridges, $1,500; Mary Higgason, $5,000; J. T. Higgason, $700; Bernice Fields Marshall, $5,000; J. I. Marshall, $1,500; and judgments were rendered accordingly.

Motions for new trials having been overruled, defendant appealed in error to this court and has assigned errors, which are, in substance, as follows:

(1) The court erred in refusing to permit defendant to file his two pleas of the statute of limitations.

(2) There was no evidence that the driver of the automobile, Malone, was, at the time of the accident, on a mission of, or on business for, defendant, Wright, and the court erred in refusing to peremptorily instruct the jury for defendant, Wright.

At the hearing before this court the first assignment of error was withdrawn, which leaves us only two questions to consider, Was Malone on the business of Wright when the accident occurred? and, Should that question have been submitted to the jury?

The defendant, Wright, was the owner and operator of the Wright Motor Company, an automobile agency, and maintained places of business in the towns of Shelbyville and Murfreesboro. His Murfreesboro business was managed by J. D. Pack. George W. Malone was an automobile salesman for the Murfreesboro branch, selling automobiles on commission. The automobile handled by the agency was the Nash.

On the afternoon of November 15, 1928, Mrs. Higgason, accompanied by Mrs. Bridges and Mrs. Marshall, was going to attend a funeral at the Hamilton Church. They were riding in a model T Ford touring car driven by Mrs. Higgason's seventeen year old son, Herbert Higgason. The Hamilton Church is on a road that leads out from the Murfreesboro road, just beyond Una, about eleven miles south of Nashville. At about 2 or 2:30 p. m. they reached a point on the Murfreesboro road where they intended to turn off for the church at their left. Herbert Higgason put out his hand, giving the signal for a left turn, and looked up and down the road, but did not see or hear any other automobile. When the front wheels of the car had gotten off of the pavement onto the side road, a Nash sedan coming from Nashville, driven by Malone, crashed into the rear of the Ford, injuring the three ladies and almost demolishing the Ford. The Nash bore a dealer's license plate, with the number D-18, for the year 1928, and was a new automobile.

Malone carried the ladies, in the Nash, to the hospital, then went with Herbert Higgason to find his father, J. T. Higgason. The three then drove to the shop and garage of Paul Womack. After conferring with Womack, Malone and young Herbert Higgason got into the Nash and drove out to the scene of the accident.

Between the city and the place of the accident, Malone stopped at a filling station and bought some gasoline, and while there he handed a business card to the operator of the station and talked to him.

At the place of the accident, Higgason got out of the car and Malone continued on in the direction of Murfreesboro. Later J. T. Higgason and Womack came to the point of the accident and joined Herbert Higgason and inspected the wrecked Ford. About dark Malone drove up, coming from the direction of Murfreesboro, driving a Pontiac coach, on which was a private car license plate.

Defendant's evidence was that Malone was not driving one of Wright's cars at the time of the accident and was not on any business or mission for Wright.

E. R. Threat, mechanic at Wright's Murfreesboro garage, testified that he worked in the same room in which the automobiles were kept, and was there all day; that on that morning Malone came to the garage driving a Pontiac, his own car, on which was the standard private owner's license plate, and told Pack that he was going to Nashville to see his girl; that he drove away in the Pontiac and did not take a Nash car out of the garage; that he returned that evening in the Pontiac; and said that he had had an accident and showed the marks of the collision on the Pontiac. He further testified that the Nash demonstration car was a coach and not a sedan.

J. D. Pack testified that he was manager of the Murfreesboro business; that Malone was employed as salesman; that on the morning of the accident Malone came to the garage in a Pontiac and asked permission to go to Nashville to see a young lady; that he left in the Pontiac automobile and returned in it that afternoon; that the Pontiac that afternoon had a regular license plate on it and not a dealer's license plate.

It appears that Malone afterwards married the girl that he went to see in Nashville, and Mrs. Malone testified that Malone took her out to lunch in Nashville at noon on that date, driving a Pontiac, and left her at 1 p. m.

The evidence of defendant's witnesses that Malone was driving a Pontiac coach registered in his own name, at the time of the accident, is directly contradicted by plaintiffs'...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • Finks v. Gillum
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Tennessee
    • August 27, 1954
    ...that the jury must determine the credibility of witnesses, not the judge. Frank v. Wright, 140 Tenn. 535, 205 S.W. 434; Wright v. Bridges, 16 Tenn.App. 576, 65 S.W.2d 265. 'We think this rule should be further extended so as to protect the constitutional right of trial by jury. We hold the ......
  • Southern Motors v. Morton
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Tennessee
    • March 21, 1941
    ...114 S.W.2d 783; Green v. Powell, 22 Tenn. App. 481, 124 S.W.2d 269; Long v. Tomlin, 22 Tenn.App. 607, 125 S.W.2d 171; Wright v. Bridges, 16 Tenn.App. 576, 65 S.W.2d 265. The true effect therefore of the Code provision is to give to proof of registration a procedural consequence that would n......
  • Ferguson v. Tomerlin
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Tennessee
    • March 16, 1983
    ...v. Carlisle, 42 Tenn.App. 195, 300 S.W.2d 59 (1956); Green v. Powell, 22 Tenn.App. 481, 124 S.W.2d 269 (1938); Wright v. Bridges, 16 Tenn.App. 576, 65 S.W.2d 265 (1933); Williams v. Bass, 8 Tenn.App. 482 This means that, before a trial judge may take the question from the jury, the evidence......
  • McAmis v. Carlisle
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Tennessee
    • July 10, 1956
    ...the case to the jury. Frank v. Wright, 140 Tenn. 535, 205 S.W. 434; Green v. Powell, 22 Tenn.App. 481, 124 S.W.2d 269; Wright v. Bridges, 16 Tenn.App. 576, 65 S.W.2d 265; Williams v. Bass, 8 Tenn.App. In Frank v. Wright, supra, the issue was whether or not Frank, the owner, was liable for t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT