 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Harvey v. Williams2/15/2002
Sally and Craig Williams, the defendants in a personal injury case, appeal the trial court's order granting a new trial. Finding that substantial evidence supports the jury's verdict and that the verdict was not contrary to law, we reverse the order granting the new trial and remand for reinstatement of the jury verdict.
FACTS
Paul Harvey's truck struck the rear passenger side of Sally Williams's vehicle in an uncontrolled intersection in Port Angeles. Williams had entered the intersection from the left and Gerald Swayze, the police officer who responded to the accident, cited Williams for failure to yield the right of way. Williams was unsuccessful in her district court challenge to the citation.
The Harveys then brought this action, seeking damages for Paul Harvey's injuries. Harvey testified at trial that he had an unobstructed view of the intersection when he approached it at about 20 to 25 mph; that he slowed, looked left and saw no vehicle; that he then looked right and saw no vehicle; and that he then looked forward just in time to see the Williams vehicle in front of him.
According to Harvey, when he saw the Williams vehicle, he turned his steering wheel to the right, slammed on his brakes, and struck the Williams vehicle on its right side near the back bumper. But defense counsel impeached Harvey with his deposition testimony in which he indicated that he looked only to the right before proceeding into the intersection.
Officer Swayze testified that neither driver said that the other was speeding. Based on the damage to the vehicles and his investigation, Swayze concluded that the vehicles had hit at a 'relatively straight' angle and had approached the intersection at approximately the same time.
Swayze acknowledged that he based his accident report solely on the information that the parties provided. He did not recall seeing skid marks, he did not take photographs or measurements at the scene, and he did not write down the parties' statements. He based his testimony about causation and fault on the fact that he issued a citation to Williams.
Williams testified that she was traveling about 20 mph; had an unobstructed view of the intersection; and, because Harvey hit her from the rear, did not see his vehicle approach from the right before she entered the intersection. Williams's husband testified and produced photographs he had taken of the accident scene, the skid marks, and the damage to their vehicle. According to his measurements, Harvey's vehicle left skid marks approximately 21 feet long.
Richard Chapman, an accident reconstructionist, testified that Williams was traveling approximately 20 mph and Harvey was traveling about 27 mph when they approached the intersection, that Williams entered the intersection approximately 1.5 seconds before Harvey, and that Harvey was approximately 50 feet from the intersection when Williams entered it. He based these opinions on interviews with the parties, his review of Swayze's accident report, and the photographs of the scene.
Chapman opined that Williams was approximately 30 feet from the intersection one second before she entered it. At that time, Harvey was still approximately 90 feet from the intersection, a sufficient distance for Williams to not see a need to yield. Based upon these calculations, Chapman concluded that the vehicles did not enter the intersection at approximately the same time. He also testified that 85 percent of the population has a reaction time of between .75 and 1.5 seconds.
Additionally, he testified that had Williams been traveling 5 mph faster, she would have entered the intersection 1.15 se
Page 1 2 3 4 5 Washington Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|