Stenburg v. Neel

Montana Supreme Court

Stenburg v. Neel

Montana Supreme Court·Decided July 14, 1980·No. 79-094·Published

Opinion

No. 79-94 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA 1980

ANDREW J. STENBERG, Plaintiff and Appellant, VS . TODD WILLIAM NEEL, Defendant and Respondent.

Appeal from: District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, In and for the County of Missoula. Honorable John Henson, Judge presiding. Counsel of Record: For Appellant: Goldman and Goldman, Missoula, Montana Jon Oldenburg argued, Missoula, Montana For Respondent: Garlington, Lohn and Robinson, Missoula, Montana Candace Fetcher argued and Gary Graham argued, Missoula, Montana

Submitted: May 29, 1980 Decided: July 14, 1980 J()L 14 19% Mr. Chief J u s t i c e Frank I . H a s w e l l d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion of t h e Court.

P l a i n t i f f b r o u g h t t h i s a c t i o n t o r e c o v e r damages f o r

p e r s o n a l i n j u r i e s s u s t a i n e d i n an a u t o m o b i l e a c c i d e n t . Plaintiff

a p p e a l s from a judgment on j u r y v e r d i c t and t h e d e n i a l o f a

motion f o r a new t r i a l .

T h i s a c t i o n a r o s e o u t o f an A p r i l 1 4 , 1975, t r a f f i c

a c c i d e n t a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n o f North Orange S t r e e t and

W e s t Broadway i n M i s s o u l a , Montana. Stenberg, t h e p l a i n t i f f

and a p p e l l a n t , was a policeman o p e r a t i n g a p o l i c e p a t r o l c a r

a t t h e t i m e of t h e a c c i d e n t .

P r i o r t o t h e a c c i d e n t S t e n b e r g had been w r i t i n g a p a r k -

i n g t i c k e t a t a l o c a t i o n s o u t h of where t h e c o l l i s i o n o c c u r r e d .

A t t h a t t i m e h e r e c e i v e d a c a l l i n f o r m i n g him of a d i s t u r b a n c e

a t a l o c a l secondhand s t o r e . During t r i a l t h e p l a i n t i f f

d e s c r i b e d what happened n e x t , a s f o l l o w s :

"When I r e c e i v e d t h e c a l l , I l e f t t h e a r e a of Second and Hickory and I t u r n e d on m p u r s u i t y l i g h t s and m overhead l i g h t s and m s i r e n . y y I t u r n e d northbound on Orange S t r e e t o f f of Second S t r e e t and proceeded a c r o s s t h e b r i d g e . The t r a f f i c w a s q u i t e heavy d u r i n g t h e l u n c h hour and I was p r e t t y much i n t h e flow of t r a f f i c going across the bridge. I g o t t o t h e n o r t h end o f t h e Orange S t r e e t b r i d g e and t h e t r a f f i c was heavy a t a l l t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n s and on the s t r e e t s , s o I had t o go on a c r o s s t h e c e n t e r l i n e t o g e t i n t o the intersection. I entered the intersection, t h e l i g h t was r e d b u t a l l t h e v e h i c l e s w e r e s t o p p e d . I g o t a b o u t half-way t h r o u g h t h e n e x t b l o c k , t r a f f i c was s t o p p e d a t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n and a g a i n I had t o go t o t h e l e f t b e c a u s e of t h e c a r s t h a t w e r e stopped. A t t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n I e n t e r e d t h e i n t e r - s e c t i o n and t h a t ' s when 1 was i n v o l v e d i n t h e accident."

Neel, t h e d e f e n d a n t , was d r i v i n g h i s a u t o m o b i l e e a s t on

Broadway when t h e a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d . H e had t h e g r e e n l i g h t

i n h i s favor. H i s testimony i n d i c a t e s t h a t he d i d n o t hear

t h e s i r e n o r s e e t h e emergency l i g h t s on t h e p a t r o l c a r .

O t h e r e y e w i t n e s s e s gave c o n f l i c t i n g t e s t i m o n y a s t o t h e a u d i b i l i t y and v i s i b i l i t y o f t h e p a t r o l c a r ' s emergency

equipment. A s t h e N e e 1 automobile e n t e r e d t h e i n t e r s e c t i o n

i t was h i t midway on t h e p a s s e n g e r s i d e by t h e f r o n t o f t h e

patrol car. A s a r e s u l t o f t h e accident Stenberg s u f f e r e d a

p i n c h e d n e r v e i n t h e neck. This has r e s u l t e d i n s e v e r e ,

incapacitating, i n t e r m i t t e n t pain.

S t e n b e r g b r o u g h t t h i s s u i t t o r e c o v e r h i s damages a r i s i n g

from t h e a c c i d e n t . The j u r y r e t u r n e d a v e r d i c t i n d e f e n d a n t ' s

favor . S t e n b e r g raises f o u r i s s u e s on a p p e a l :

1. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n i n s t r u c t i n g t h e

j u r y on t h e s t a n d a r d o f c a r e a p p l i c a b l e t o t h e p l a i n t i f f ?

2. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n i n s t r u c t i n g t h e

j u r y t o a p p l y t h e law o f c o n t r i b u t o r y n e g l i g e n c e r a t h e r t h a n

t h e law o f c o m p a r a t i v e n e g l i g e n c e ?

3. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n r e f u s i n g t o g i v e

two of p l a i n t i f f ' s proposed i n s t r u c t i o n s ?

4. Whether t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t e r r e d i n n o t g r a n t i n g t h e

p l a i n t i f f ' s motion f o r a new t r i a l ?

S t e n b e r g c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t e r r e d by g i v i n g

c o u r t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n no. 1 5 which i n s t r u c t e d t h e j u r y a s t o

s t a n d a r d of c a r e a p p l i c a b l e t o b o t h p a r t i e s . This i n s t r u c t i o n

reads :

"The l e g a l s t a n d a r d o f c a r e g o v e r n i n g t h e c o n d u c t o f motor v e h i c l e o p e r a t o r s i s u n v a r y i n g , and rests a l i k e upon a l l d r i v e r s a t a l l t i m e s . The s t a n d a r d o f -r-i-t h e c o n d u c t - - o r d i n a r i l y p r u d e n t - ca e s of a n p e r s o n - -e same o r s i m i l a r c i r c u m s t a n c e s ; i n i n th -- o t h e r words, o r d i n a r y c a r e . Ordinary c a r e , a s t h e t e r m i s used i n t h e s e i n s t r u c t i o n s means t h a t d e g r e e -- -which a r e a s o n a b l e p r u d e n t p e r s o n would - of c a r e -- use o r e x e r c i s e unaer - - - s i m i l a r circumstances, - t h e same o r i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e same o r s i m i l a r m a t t e r s t o a v o i d i n j u r y , and it i m p l i e s t h e u s e o f such c a r e a s i s f a i r l y commensurate w i t h t h e danger t o be a v o i d e d when measured by t h e s t a n d a r d s o f common prudence and e x p e r i e n c e . "And, g e n e r a l l y s p e a k i n g , n e g l i g e n c e i s , t h e r e f o r e , - - of t h e want -- o r d i n a r y c a r e , t h e f a i l u r e t o do what a r e a s o n a b l e and p r u d e n t p e r s o n would o r d i n a r i l y have done under - c i r c u m s t a n c e s - -e s i t u a t i o n , the of t h o r t h e d o i n g what s u c h a p e r s o n under t h e e x i s t i n g c i r c u m s t a n c e s would n o t have done.

"Negligence may a l s o c o n s i s t i n t h e d o i n g of some a c t which t h e law f o r b i d s , o r i n t h e f a i l u r e t o do t h a t which t h e law commands.

" I n t h i s a c t i o n any n e g l i g e n c e i s of no consequence u n l e s s i t was a p r o x i m a t e c a u s e of t h e i n j u r i e s and damages complained by t h e p l a i n t i f f ." (Emphasis added. )

S t e n b e r g c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e i n s t r u c t i o n was i n c o r r e c t ,

b e c a u s e of c e r t a i n language which a p p e a r s i n s e c t i o n 61-8-107,

MCA. This s t a t u t e g r a n t s c e r t a i n p r i v i l e g e s t o t h e o p e r a t o r s

o f a u t h o r i z e d emergency v e h i c l e s . S e c t i o n 61-8-107, MCA, w a s

s e t f o r t h i n s u b s t a n t i a l p a r t i n t h e c o u r t ' s i n s t r u c t i o n no.

16. The i n s t r u c t i o n r e a d s i n p a r t :

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