Home/Supreme Court of Virginia/Brown v. Wallace

Brown v. Wallace

35 S.E.2d 793, 184 Va. 570, 1945 Va. LEXIS 177
CourtSupreme Court of Virginia
DecidedNovember 19, 1945
DocketRecord No. 2958
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 35 S.E.2d 793 (Brown v. Wallace) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Brown v. Wallace, 35 S.E.2d 793, 184 Va. 570, 1945 Va. LEXIS 177 (Va. 1945).

Opinion

Spratley, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

James Wallace instituted this proceeding against H. W. Brown and Charles Zigenfuss, trading as H. W. Brown & Company, to recover damages for injuries sustained by him as a result of a collision between a motor bus operated by him and a tractor-trailer truck owned and operated by the defendants, and driven at the time by their employee, Harry Lawrence. The defendants filed a plea of not guilty. They moved to strike the plaintiff’s evidence at its conclusion, on the ground that his own testimony disclosed his contributory negligence as a matter of law. The motion was overruled, and the jury, after hearing all of the evidence, returned a verdict in favor of Wallace for $15,000. The verdict was approved by the trial judge and judgment entered thereon.

The defendants contend that the verdict was contrary to the law and the evidence; that the court erred in granting and refusing certain instructions; that the misconduct of three jurors during the trial and the improper argument of plaintiff’s counsel justified a mistrial; and that the damages awarded were excessive.

The major portions of the brief and the argument of the defendants are devoted to their contention that the evidence shows that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.

It is conceded that the jury’s verdict has established the [574]*574negligence of the defendants’ driver. Since it is further true that the verdict has settled all conflicts of the evidence in favor of the plaintiff, it will be necessary to set out only so much of it as is favorable to the plaintiff and so much as may be required to consider defendants’ remaining assignments of error.

The collision occurred September 22, 1943, between 4:15 and 4:30 P. M., at the intersection of U. S. Highways 13 and 17, in Norfolk county, Virginia. The weather was clear and the roads were dry. Each highway is hard surfaced. Route 13 runs approximately east and west and has an overall width of about 60. feet with a 20 foot strip of ground separating the east and west lanes of travel. There are no trees, shrubbery or structures on this strip to obstruct the vision. Route 17 runs approximately north and south and has an overall width of 43 feet, which widens somewhat as it approaches the south side of Route 13. There is a narrow concrete safety isle in its middle, 150 feet long, separating the north and south lanes of travel immediately south of Route 13. The roads do not intersect at true right angles. The map or diagram on the opposite page shows the scene of the accident and the location of the traffic lights.

Four sets of automatic traffic lights, operated by two light devices, one within the area where Route 17 crosses the east bound lane of Route 13 and the other within the area where 17 crosses the west bound lane of 13, control the flow of traffic in the lanes of travel north, south, east and west. Each device is equipped with red, amber and green lights. At a distance of between 154 and 160 feet from each of these four sets of lights there is, in each lane of travel, a metal strip, a light trip, laid' across the roadway. A vehicle passing over the trip actuates the lights causing them to work as ordinary traffic lights. When red shows up facing traffic of Route 17 green should show for traffic on Route 13; and vice versa, when 13 had a red light a green light was due on 17. Green is a “go” light, red a “stop” [575]*575light, and amber a “caution” light which indicates that the red light is about to come on.

The intersection is wide open and clear to approaching travelers. There is a gas station with a number of pumps in front of it, located in its south-eastern angle. The station building is 55 feet from the south side of Route 13, and approximately the same distance from the eastern side of Route 17. The pumps are 28 feet from the south side of [576]*576Route 13. The station and the pumps, however, offer but a momentary obstruction to the view of travelers approaching the intersection bound north on 17 or west on 13. At a point on Route 17, 100 feet south of the southern line of Route 13 vision is unobstructed for at least four hundred and ten feet to the east of the eastern line of 17 where it crosses. In reverse, one traveling west on Route 13 has an unobstructed view of’ Route 17 for a distance of four hundred and ten feet south of its intersection with Route 13.

[575]

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Packer v. Hampden Transfer & Storage Co.
111 A.2d 849 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1992)
Dodd v. Coakley
79 S.E.2d 648 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1954)
Nash v. Holzbeierlein & Sons, Inc.
68 A.2d 403 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1949)
Brown v. Armstrong
35 S.E.2d 800 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1945)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 S.E.2d 793, 184 Va. 570, 1945 Va. LEXIS 177, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-wallace-va-1945.