RAWSON V. CITY OF OMAHA
322 N.W.2d 381 (1982)
NATURE OF THE CASE: Rawson (P) appealed a judgment that held P could not recover under
contribution from City (D) for damages caused solely by the negligence of D.
FACTS: P was driving her car when her right front tire suddenly struck a large pothole in
the street, causing her to lose control of her car. The car crossed the centerline and
struck the left rear of a pickup owned and operated by Rogers. P's car then continued
westbound and the left front of her vehicle struck the left front of a vehicle owned and
operated by Black. The collision with Black's car spun P's vehicle around and it came to
rest in the westbound lane of traffic pointing in an eastward direction approximately 270
feet from the location of the pothole. Rogers made a claim for property damage in the amount
of $492.41. Black also made a claim for property damage to his vehicle and for his personal
injury against P. It was settled without trial for the sum of $11,215.50. A second suit
filed by Black's daughter and her children against P was likewise settled for the sum of
$1,665. P was required to pay to the various claimants the total sum of $13,372.91 in
settlement of all the claims that were made against her as a result of the accidents. P's
vehicle was a total loss. P filed a written claim with D. D never responded to the claim and
P filed a lawsuit. P claimed damages and contribution. At trial, D denied the existence of
any negligence on its part and alleged that the sole proximate cause of the accident and the
injury sustained to the various third persons with whom P settled was a result of P's
negligence. D also claimed that P had the last clear chance to avoid the accident. The trial
court held that the sole proximate cause of the accident was the negligence of D. The trial
court ordered D to pay P the loss related to her motor vehicle. The trial court then held
that because P was not at all negligent, and the negligence was solely that of the D, P
could not recover from D under the theory of contribution. This appeal resulted.
ISSUE:
RULE OF LAW:
HOLDING AND DECISION:
LEGAL ANALYSIS:
Get
free access to the entire content for Mac, PC or Online
for 2-3 days and free samples
of all kinds of products.
for 2-3 days and free samples of all kinds of products.
https://bsmsphd.com
© 2007-2016 Abn Study Partner
No comments:
Post a Comment