Sylvester Wiley v. Freda Thomas and Bob Maddox Chrysler Plymounth, Inc.

Automobile Accident - Motorcycle - Contributory Negligence - Assumption of Risk - ZSylvester Wiley sued Freda Thomas and Bob Maddox Chrysler
Plymouth, Inc. ("Bob Maddox"), to recover damages for injuries
sustained in a collision between a motorcycle operated by Wiley
and an automobile driven by Thomas.

Defendants asserted defenses of contributory negligence,
avoidance of consequences (an aspect of contributory negligence),
and assumption of risk.

Evidence was presented showing the fault of all parties. The
intersection at which the collision occurred is not controlled by
stop or yield signs in any direction, and Bob Maddox had parked
cars along the roadway obstructing both drivers' views. Thomas
failed to stop her car even though she was exiting the parking lot
of the dealership onto a roadway. However, she had been to the
dealership only once before and had not observed any traffic at
this intersection. Wiley, on the other hand, worked at an
adjacent dealership and was aware of the hazards surrounding the
intersection. He knew that vehicles exiting the dealership did
not stop and, although had not seen any collisions, he had
observed a number of "near misses." Although Wiley testified that
he was proceeding along the roadway
at a safe rate of speed and slowed down before the collision, a Bob
Maddox employee who witnessed the collision testified otherwise. For
the most part, evidence of Wiley's damages was either uncontested or
not preserved in the record.

At trial, the jury was given a special verdict form
containing four questions. The first question required the jury
to determine if plaintiff was in some way negligent and
contributed to his own damages and, if so, to apportion the
negligence by assigning a percentage to it. The second and third
questions required the jury to make the same findings as to each
defendant. The fourth question required the jury to find in what
amount the plaintiff was damaged.

The jury responded to the first three questions on the
special verdict form by finding that each party was chargeable
with equal negligence (i.e., 33 and 1/3 percent) contributing to
plaintiff's damages. But, in response to the last question, the
jury found that plaintiff sustained no damages.

Before entry of judgment on the verdict, Wiley moved for a
new trial. Several days later, the trial court, without entering
judgment on the verdict, ordered a new trial on the ground that
the verdict was "contrary to law."

Unknown

Unknown

Affirmed by the Georgia Court of Appeals. See: 240 Ga. App. 135 (1999, ___ S.E.2d ___. Note: The above date reflects the appellate court decision date, not the original trial date. Reported by kkm.