Gray v. City of Monroe

930 So. 2d 1148, 2006 WL 1329962
CourtLouisiana Court of Appeal
DecidedMay 17, 2006
Docket41,087-CA
StatusPublished
Cited by8 cases

This text of 930 So. 2d 1148 (Gray v. City of Monroe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Louisiana Court of Appeal primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gray v. City of Monroe, 930 So. 2d 1148, 2006 WL 1329962 (La. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

930 So.2d 1148 (2006)

Michael L. GRAY, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants
v.
CITY OF MONROE, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 41,087-CA.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

May 17, 2006.

*1149 Fewell-Kitchens by Richard L. Fewell, Jr., for Appellants.

Nanci S. Summersgill, for Appellees.

Before BROWN, CARAWAY, and DREW, JJ.

BROWN, C.J.

This is a personal injury action arising out of an intersectional collision between a Ford F-150 truck being driven by plaintiff, Jimmy Gardner, and a City of Monroe fire truck. The Ford truck was owned by plaintiff, Michael L. Gray. The driver of the fire truck, Claude Randall Thompson, and the City of Monroe were named as defendants. Following the presentation of plaintiffs' case on the merits, defendants moved for an involuntary dismissal.

Plaintiffs claim that the fire truck had a red light; however, the driver of the fire truck testified that he had a green light. The trial court found that the Ford truck was coming off the interstate and went through the intersection at a "rapid rate of speed and he apparently didn't slow down or try to avoid the fire truck (which) almost got through the intersection before it was struck." The trial court further found that the fire truck proceeded into the intersection with its siren on and lights flashing. The court observed that the driver of the fire truck "was doing everything he was supposed to do." The motion for dismissal was then granted. Plaintiffs have appealed. Finding no error, we affirm.

Discussion

La. C.C.P. article 1672(B) states:

In an action tried by the court without a jury, after the plaintiff has completed the presentation of his evidence, any party, without waiving his right to offer evidence in the event the motion is not granted, may move for a dismissal of the action as to him on the ground that upon the facts and law, the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. The court may then determine the facts and render judgment against the plaintiff and in favor *1150 of the moving party or may decline to render any judgment until the close of all the evidence.

A motion for involuntary dismissal requires the trial court to evaluate all of the evidence presented by plaintiffs and render a decision based upon the preponderance of the evidence. King of Hearts, Inc., v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 27,137 (La. App.2d Cir.8/23/95), 660 So.2d 524. An appellate court should not reverse an involuntary dismissal in the absence of manifest error, and there is no manifest error if there is a reasonable factual basis for the finding of the trial court. Silva v. Calk, 30,085 (La.App.2d Cir.12/10/97), 708 So.2d 418.

La. R.S. 32:24, provides in relevant part:

A. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle, when responding to an emergency call, or when in the pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law, or when responding to, but not upon returning from, a fire alarm, may exercise the privileges set forth in this Section, but subject to the conditions herein stated.
B. The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle may:
. . .
(2) Proceed past a red or stop signal or stop sign, but only after slowing down or stopping as may be necessary for safe operation;
. . .
D. The foregoing provisions shall not relieve the driver of an authorized vehicle from the duty to drive with due regard for the safety of all persons, nor shall such provisions protect the driver from the consequences of his reckless disregard for the safety of others.

Plaintiffs cite Cascio v. City of Monroe, 530 So.2d 1170 (La.App. 2d Cir.1988), in which this court held the driver of a City of Monroe fire truck predominately at fault for running a red light and colliding with Cascio. The court wrote that the fire truck operator "should have foreseen that vehicles favored with the green light would be crossing the Louisville intersection and he should have proceeded with extreme caution." Id. at 1174.

This accident occurred on September 29, 2002, and the evidence and testimony showed that plaintiff, Jimmy Gardner, was the driver and only occupant of the Ford truck and that he was going to the hospital where his girlfriend was in labor. Gardner left I-20 and was traveling east down the ramp to the intersection with U.S. Highway 165 (Business/Civic Center Boulevard). At this intersection, Hwy. 165 is four lanes heading north and south with a fifth lane for southbound traffic turning left (east) onto Calypso Street. The intersection is controlled by a traffic light. Claude Thompson, a Monroe city firefighter, was driving a Monroe fire truck south on U.S. Highway 165 heading towards the intersection with Calypso Street. The fire truck had almost cleared that intersection when it was struck on the left rear quarter panel by the Ford truck with such force as to be knocked over onto its side.

Jimmy Gardner testified that he had no memory of the accident due to his injuries. Nicholas Frith was 15 years old when he witnessed the accident. Nicholas was sitting behind the passenger's seat of a car driven by his brother, Sydney Frith. Nicholas testified that his brother's car was going south on Hwy. 165 and had stopped at the red light in the left turning lane when the accident occurred. Their intent was to turn onto Calypso. He observed Gardner turning his head toward the Frith car, but he did not see Gardner looking any other way. Nicholas admitted that, from his vantage point, he could not see either Gardner's or the fire truck's signal light but that his brother had a yellow turn light. Nicholas testified that *1151 Gardner's truck was going down the exit ramp fast; Gardner's truck hit the fire truck's back left side; and the collision lifted the fire truck up and knocked it onto its side.[1]

Daniel McCarty testified that he was sitting beside Nicholas Frith in the back seat of Frith's brother's car when the accident occurred. Sydney Frith and Lisa McCarty, Daniel's sister, were in the front seat. They were later married and stationed in Guam at the time of trial. Daniel, who was 13 years old at the time of the accident, gave confusing testimony as to who had the red or green light. Like Nicholas, Daniel testified that Gardner looked at their car, but did not look ahead at the fire truck. Daniel did not recall a yellow turn arrow for the Frith vehicle and testified that the Ford was exiting the ramp "a little fast." Daniel could not see the color of the signal light for either Gardner or the fire truck.[2]

Corporal J.L. Sanders, with the Monroe Police Department for 14 years, worked the accident in question. Corporal Sanders read from the accident report noting that, "It says based on witness information it appears, I didn't say it was, it appears that vehicle one (fire truck) had a red light and vehicle two (the Ford) had a green light." Corporal Sanders also testified that the posted speed limit for the traffic on Hwy. 165 was 35 mph and that the estimated speed of the fire truck was 45 mph. Corporal Sanders further testified that the posted speed for coming off the I-20 ramp was 30 mph, and the estimated speed for the Ford was 50 mph. Both of these estimates came from eyewitnesses to the accident. Corporal Sanders testified that he did not find any brake marks for the Ford which would have indicated that Gardner attempted to brake and avoid the crash.

Claude Randall Thompson was the driver of the fire truck.

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

Related

Roberson v. Chance
182 So. 3d 203 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2015)
Harter v. Harter
127 So. 3d 5 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2013)
Janway v. Jones
88 So. 3d 713 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2012)
Atkins v. City of Shreveport
48 So. 3d 326 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)
Hunter v. James Machine Works, Inc.
48 So. 3d 1103 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)
Chandler v. Chandler
37 So. 3d 569 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)
Lowe v. Skyjacker Suspensions
32 So. 3d 340 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2010)
Bartley v. Fondren
999 So. 2d 146 (Louisiana Court of Appeal, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
930 So. 2d 1148, 2006 WL 1329962, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-city-of-monroe-lactapp-2006.