Williams v. Donohoe

353 P.2d 521, 222 Or. 578, 1960 Ore. LEXIS 519
CourtOregon Supreme Court
DecidedJune 29, 1960
StatusPublished

This text of 353 P.2d 521 (Williams v. Donohoe) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Oregon Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Williams v. Donohoe, 353 P.2d 521, 222 Or. 578, 1960 Ore. LEXIS 519 (Or. 1960).

Opinion

HOLMAN, J.

(Pro Tempore)

The plaintiff, Ruth Williams, brought this action against the defendant, Stephen E. Donohoe, for damages for personal injuries arising out of an automobile accident between vehicles driven by the respective parties which occurred while they were proceeding around a circular island where N. E. 39th avenue and N. E. Glisan street in the city of Portland would intersect. Glisan street lies in an easterly and westerly direction, while 39th avenue runs northerly and southerly. Each street is 48 feet wide and can accommodate two lanes of traffic moving in each direction. The island is approximately 190 feet in diameter and approximately 590 feet in circumference. The traveled thoroughfare around the island is sufficiently wide to accommodate two lanes of traffic moving in the same direction. There are dividers in each street at their approach to the island, requiring all traffic approaching the island to proceed to the right around it. As [580]*580a result all traffic around the island is one-way in a counterclockwise direction. A diagram to approximate scale is hereinafter set forth for clarification.

Both the parties were proceeding from west to east on Glisan street. Plaintiff was in the outside or most southerly lane of traffic, and defendant was in the inside lane closest to the center line. Both entered the circular thoroughfare around the island at approximately the same time. Plaintiff was anticipating going three-quarters of the way around the island and exiting in a northerly direction on 39th avenue. Defendant was anticipating going half way around the island and continuing east on Glisan. While the evidence is conflicting as to the exact point of impact, it would appear that the accident happened as plaintiff attempted to proceed on around the island while defendant was attempting to continue easterly on Glisan after completing his half circle. Defendant admitted in his testimony that at the point of impact plaintiff was still in the same lane of traffic in which she had previously been proceeding.

“Q And my question was, if you were in the left-hand lane, in which lane was Mrs. Williams’ car?
“A In the right-hand.
“Q Did she change lanes?
“A I did not see her car after she dropped back from my vision going around this circle. I did not see her until I felt the impact of the car there, and she was to my right, (indicating)
“Q Judging from the point of impact, was she still in the right-hand lane at the moment of impact?
“A Yes.”

[581]*581 QI0HCQZxLKSqjkwOcM1sc2Ufp

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

Related

McVay v. Byars
138 P.2d 210 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
353 P.2d 521, 222 Or. 578, 1960 Ore. LEXIS 519, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/williams-v-donohoe-or-1960.