Young, Adm'r v. Dodson Young, Adm'r v. Dodson

Young, Adm'r v. Dodson

239 Ark. 143, 388 S.W.2d 94, AR.0042683(1965)

    • 0,99 €
    • 0,99 €

Publisher Description

Appellant, Melvin A. Young, was severely injured, and his wife, Fay, was killed in a head-on collision on May 4, 1963, on U.S. Highway No. 82, in Columbia County. The collision (according to the complaint filed in the Circuit Court by Young) occurred when a gravel truck, operated by Dalton Dodson, attempted to go around an International truck with attached trailer, which had stopped upon the highway, and within the mouth of a concrete underpass. The latter vehicle was operated by George Burns, an employee of Elk Roofing Company, owner of the International truck and trailer. In his complaint, Young alleged permanent injuries, and likewise sought damages because of the death of his wife. The complaint asserted negligence on the part of Dodson in operating the loaded gravel truck at an excessive and reckless rate of speed; in failing to observe the stopped truck (and the automobile of a non-party to this litigation, which was stopped behind the Elk truck), and also asserted that Dodson was driving without adequate brakes. It was alleged that Elk Roofing Company and its agent and employee, George Burns, were negligent in voluntarily stopping the International truck on the traveled portion of the highway, and at a point within the narrow confines of the highway tunnel, or underpass. Appellant asserted that the collision and resulting damage were due to the ""sole, joint, combined and concurrent carelessness and negligence"" of each of the defendants. Subsequently, appellant filed his ""Request for Admission"" on each of the parties sued, and the latter filed their responses. Based on these responses, Young sought a summary judgment against appellees, but this was denied. Thereafter, the case proceeded to trial, and the jury returned a verdict of $31,800.00 against Dodson, but found for appellees Burns and Elk Roofing Company. From the judgment entered in accordance with the jury verdict, Young brings this appeal. For reversal, appellant relies upon five separate points, which we will refer to in the order listed.

GENRE
Professional & Technical
RELEASED
1965
15 March
LANGUAGE
EN
English
LENGTH
2
Pages
PUBLISHER
LawApp Publishers
SIZE
71.7
KB

More Books by Supreme Court of Arkansas

White v. Georgia-Pacific Corporation White v. Georgia-Pacific Corporation
1999
Nance v. State Nance v. State
1999
State Police Comm. v. Smith State Police Comm. v. Smith
1999
Mcgehee v. State Mcgehee v. State
1999
State v. Earl State v. Earl
1999
Arkansas Dept. of Human Serv. v. Heath Arkansas Dept. of Human Serv. v. Heath
1991