Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Widget HTML #1

(Download) "Jolene Zagarri v. Charlotte B. Nichols" by Supreme Court of Missouri ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free

Jolene Zagarri v. Charlotte B. Nichols

📘 Read Now     📥 Download


eBook details

  • Title: Jolene Zagarri v. Charlotte B. Nichols
  • Author : Supreme Court of Missouri
  • Release Date : January 08, 1968
  • Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
  • Pages : * pages
  • Size : 62 KB

Description

This is a suit for $50,000 damages for personal injuries sustained by a 4-year-old child who was struck by an automobile driven by defendant. A trial jury returned a verdict for defendant. Plaintiff appealed. The collision between automobile and child occurred in an alley in the City of St. Louis on a clear sunny day at about 5 o'clock p.m. The alley was of paved concrete approximately 15 feet wide. Garages and fences bordered the alley on the north side. Defendant, operating a 1957 Ford automobile, the brakes of which were in good working order, was proceeding east, in the middle of the alley, 4 or 5 feet distant from the garages and fences to the left of the driver. The defendant had operated the automobile about 150 feet in the alley at the time of collision. The highest speed attained in the alley was 13 m.p.h. There were no obstructions to the defendant's view, such as other vehicles, telephone poles, etc. Defendant was aware of the fact that this was a residential neighborhood and that normally there were a number of children around there. When defendant's automobile was ""a couple"" of houses west of the point of impact defendant saw and passed some children (other than plaintiff) walking westwardly on the left side of the alley. When defendant first saw them she slowed down to 6, 8 or 10 m.p.h. but did not alter the course of the automobile. After passing them defendant started to go faster again but did not have ""a chance to go very fast because it happened then."" Defendant saw plaintiff before the car struck her. Plaintiff was not directly in front of the automobile. Defendant gave the police investigator a statement as follows: ""I was driving east in the alley preceding the accident when I saw a group of children, and slowed up. I was going very slow when very suddenly a small child appeared in front of me on my left. I immediately applied my brakes when the child was hit by the left front of the car."" Defendant testified at various times that when she first saw her the child was ""a couple of feet"" to the left side of the car - ""two or three feet"" - from the path of the automobile, ""moving,"" or ""going"" east ""at a slant to her right,"" in a southeast direction; that plaintiff was ""just a little bit ahead"" of the front of the car; a foot or so ahead and a foot or so in front of the front bumper, and once she testified that the child was never ahead of the car. Defendant did not know whether plaintiff's gait was a walk, trot or run and did not know how fast plaintiff was moving. Defendant saw the back of plaintiff's head and 4 or 5 inches below the shoulder level. Plaintiff never did see the automobile. When defendant first saw plaintiff ""off to her left"" the automobile was traveling at a speed variously estimated by defendant at 6, 8 or 10 m.p.h. Defendant put on the brakes. She did not sound a horn or swerve the car to one side. She did not have time ""to do anything but slam on the brakes."" The speed of the automobile had been reduced ""a little"" at the time of contact. The left headlight struck plaintiff in the back of the head and she fell down sideways, ""right at the point where she was struck."" The automobile did not move ""very far"" after striking the child. Plaintiff was lying even with the middle of the left door when the car stopped. There was a pool of blood, left on the concrete where the child lay, 3 feet south of the rear fence of 6024 Columbia Street and 7 feet west of the east end of the fence which ran along the north side of the alley. There were ""overgrown vines"" on the fence and bushes around the fences at the point where the accident happened. The bushes and vines were higher than the top of the fence.


Download Ebook "Jolene Zagarri v. Charlotte B. Nichols" PDF ePub Kindle