Hodge v. Beaman

Michigan Supreme Court

Hodge v. Beaman

293 N.W. 710, 294 Mich. 442, 1940 Mich. LEXIS 771

CourtMichigan Supreme Court

DecidedSeptember 6, 1940

DocketDocket No. 21, Calendar No. 41,081.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 293 N.W. 710 (Hodge v. Beaman) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hodge v. Beaman, 293 N.W. 710, 294 Mich. 442, 1940 Mich. LEXIS 771 (Mich. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

This is a guest passenger case. The alleged gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct of defendant consisted in driving, in the afternoon of a summer day, at 40 miles per hour in a driving rain and high wind and poor visibility and, while trying to pass a truck upon a three-lane highway, contact with an oncoming automobile *Page 443 caused defendant's car to swing around on the wet pavement into the path of another car and in the collision plaintiff was seriously injured. The court directed a verdict for defendant and this appeal is by plaintiff. This did not constitute gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct.

Affirmed.

See Findlay v. Davis, 263 Mich. 179; Grabowski v. Seyler,261 Mich. 473; Keilitz v. Elley, 276 Mich. 701;Rowe v. Vander Kolk, 278 Mich. 564; Raby v. Dodge, 279 Mich. 626; In re Mueller's Estate, 280 Mich. 203.

Defendant will recover costs.

BUSHNELL, C.J., and SHARPE, CHANDLER, NORTH, McALLISTER, and BUTZEL, JJ., concurred. The late Justice POTTER took no part in this decision.

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

This is a guest passenger case. The alleged gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct of defendant consisted in driving, in the afternoon of a summer day, at 40 miles per hour in a driving rain and high wind and poor visibility and, while trying to pass a truck upon a three-lane highway, contact with an oncoming automobile *Page 443 caused defendant's car to swing around on the wet pavement into the path of another car and in the collision plaintiff was seriously injured. The court directed a verdict for defendant and this appeal is by plaintiff. This did not constitute gross negligence or wilful and wanton misconduct.

Affirmed.

See Findlay v. Davis, 263 Mich. 179; Grabowski v. Seyler,261 Mich. 473; Keilitz v. Elley, 276 Mich. 701;Rowe v. Vander Kolk, 278 Mich. 564; Raby v. Dodge, 279 Mich. 626; In re Mueller's Estate, 280 Mich. 203.

Defendant will recover costs.

BUSHNELL, C.J., and SHARPE, CHANDLER, NORTH, McALLISTER, and BUTZEL, JJ., concurred. The late Justice POTTER took no part in this decision.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 N.W. 710, 294 Mich. 442, 1940 Mich. LEXIS 771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hodge-v-beaman-mich-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack