Beck v. Jeppensen Et Al‪.‬

McDONOUGH, Justice. Respondent Beck received a judgment in the lower court for the sums of $564 general damages and medical
expenses and $590 damages to his automobile in an action tried without a jury and based upon a collision with appellant Jeppesen's
delivery truck, then driven by his agent, appellant Harward. The accident occurred at an intersection of two alleys located
in the middle of a block in the business section of Provo City. Plaintiff, respondent herein, was driving in an easterly direction
and defendants were driving north; the collision occurred when the two automobiles came upon each other at the corner of the
Paramount Theater building, located on the Southwest corner of the alley intersection in such a manner that it blocks the
view from either alley as to the approach of cars from the other alley. Both parties testified that as soon as each saw the
other automobile, he applied his brakes but the collision occurred, knocking plaintiff's automobile across the alley and smashing
the left side of his car against a telephone pole. The left side of the automobile was the most severely damaged but the greater
part of the testimony was devoted to the condition of the right side of plaintiff's car in an attempt to show that plaintiff
had the right of way in the intersection; plaintiff's testimony indicated that the damage to the right side of his car began
behind the right front wheel. Defendants claim that after their truck had stopped, plaintiff went past scrubbing the entire
length of the plaintiff's car along the truck bumper. Both cars were just starting up after having been stopped in the respective
alleys. Defendants estimated plaintiff's speed at 25 to 40 miles per hour; plaintiff claims that he was going about 10 miles
per hour. Defendants estimated their own speed at 3 to 5 miles per hour. Defendants' theory of the case is that their truck was in the alley intersection before the car of the plaintiff, that defendant
Jeppesen, owner and passenger in the truck driven by defendant Harward, saw plaintiff's car approaching at a distance of 30
to 40 feet away at a high rate of speed and shouted 'Hold it!' whereupon Harward applied the brakes, stopping at a position
where the nose of the truck was two feet beyond the Paramount building, after which plaintiff continued by, scrubbing the
right side of his car against defendants' bumper. Under these facts, defendants contend that (1) plaintiff's evidence does
not support a finding that defendants were negligent nor does such evidence support a finding that defendants' negligence,
if any, was the proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries and (2) that the lower court should have found that plaintiff was
contributorily negligent as a matter of law and from the facts.