DAVIS v BAINTER

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

No. 12834 I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF M N A A OTN 1975 JAMES DAVIS and LUCY DAVIS, p l a i n t i f f s and A p p e l l a n t s , -vs - CHARLES R. BAINThX, Defendant and Respondent. Appeal from: D i s t r i c t Court o f t h e S i x t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Honorable Jack D. Shanstrom, Judge p r e s i d i n g . Counsel of Record: For Appellants : C o r e t t e , Smith and Dean, B u t t e , Montana Dolphy 0. Pohlman a r g u e d , B u t t e , Montana F o r Respondent: Berg, Angel, A n d r i o l o and Morgan, Bozeman, Montana C h a r l e s F. Ange 1 a r g u e d , Bozeman, Montana Anderson, Syrnmes, Forbes, P e e t e and Brown, B i l l i n g s , Montana Submitted: Decided : Filed : :flfi.-{ > March 4 , 1975 MAY 2 8 191q .. 2 I :- " M r . J u s t i c e Gene B. Daly d e l i v e r e d t h e Opinion o f t h e Court. This i s an a p p e a l from a judgment e n t e r e d i n t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t , Sweet Grass County, on a j u r y v e r d i c t , a g a i n s t p l a i n t i f f s James and Lucy Davis and i n f a v o r of defendant Charles R. B a i n t e r . P l a i n t i f f s a l s o appeal from an o r d e r of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t denying t h e i r motion f o r a new t r i a l . The a c t i o n a r o s e o u t of an automobile a c c i d e n t i n v o l v i n g ~ a i n t e r ' sc a t t l e t r u c k , and an automobile owned by M r . and Mrs. Vernie Hathaway, i n which Lucy Davis was a passenger. A s a result of t h e a c c i d e n t , Hathaways were k i l l e d i n s t a n t l y and Lucy Davis received severe i n j u r i e s . The automobile i t s e l f was t o t a l e d . B a i n t e r t r u c k i n c u r r e d l i t t l e damage. The B a i n t e r r e c e i v e d no i n j u r i e s , b u t was h o s p i t a l i z e d a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t f o r shock. P l a i n t i f f s Davis b r i n g t h i s a p p e a l on t h e i s s u e of whether a t h e j u r y r e n d e r e d l v e r d i c t which was c o n t r a r y t o t h e g r e a t weight o f t h e evidence. The a c c i d e n t occurred June 29, 1973, a t t h e Springdale t u r n o f f , l o c a t e d between Big Timber and Livingston on U. S. Highway 10. The following diagram i n d i c a t e s t h e r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n s o f t h e p a r t i e s and w i t n e s s e s s h o r t l y b e f o r e t h e a c c i d e n t : N RH OT W Livingston ( Big Tm e,+ i b r- Lucy Davis was a passenger i n a s t a t i o n wagon d r i v e n by M r . Hathaway (H) proceeding west toward Livingston. B a i n t e r (B) was d r i v i n g a s t o c k t r u c k e a s t toward Big Timber when he n o t i c e d t h e c a r i n f r o n t of him, driven by Ronning (R) was s i g n a l i n g f o r a l e f t t u r n onto t h e Springdale road. P l a i n t i f f s o r i g i n a l l y named Ronning a s a codefendant, b u t upon h i s motion t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i s missed Ronning a s a p a r t y defendant. The e v e n t s which t e n occurred a r e i n d i s p u t e , b u t t h e c o l l i s i o n d i d occur between ~ a i n t e r ' st r u c k and t h e Hathaway c a r . The l e f t f r o n t of t h e Hathaway c a r c o l l i d e d w i t h t h e l e f t r e a r of t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k and t h e t o p of t h e c a r was completely sheared o f f . Highway Patrolman Clarence Owen i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e a c c i d e n t and took s t a t e m e n t s from t h e w i t n e s s e s i n c l u d i n g B a i n t e r ; Ronning; John Esp, a passenger i n ~ o n n i n g ' sv e h i c l e ; and Lyle Ehlke (E), who was following t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k a t t h e time of t h e a c c i d e n t , p l a i n t i f f s ' t h e o r y evolves from t h e testimony of Lloyd Ronning and John Esp. raining. The day t h e a c c i d e n t took p l a c e i t had been A t t h e time of t h e a c c i d e n t i t was only m i s t i n g , b u t t h e r e was s t a n d i n g water on t h e road. Ronning t e s t i f i e d t h a t a s he was slowing t o make t h e l e f t t u r n i n t o Springdale, he saw t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k c l o s i n g i n on him; t h a t t h e t r u c k was zigzagging; and, t h a t h e was a f r a i d t h a t an a c c i d e n t might occur because t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k seemed t o be o u t of c o n t r o l . Ronning turned r i g h t onto a t u r n o f f . To prevent an a c c i d e n t , He d i d n o t s e e t h e a c c i d e n t occur between t h e Hathaway c a r and ~ a i n t e r ' st r u c k . John Esp, t h e passenger i n ~ o n n i n g ' sc a r , s a i d he t u r n e d around t o look o u t t h e back window when Ronning t o l d him t h e r e might be an a c c i d e n t . Esp t e s t i f i e d t h a t he t o o saw ~ a i n t e r ' s t r u c k zigzagging down t h e r o a d , a s i t was approaching them. However, he a l s o f a i l e d t o s e e t h e a c t u a l a c c i d e n t t a k e p l a c e between B a i n t e r and Ha thaway . From t h e above testimony, p l a i n t i f f s maintain t h e a c c i d e n t occurred when t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k , because i t was o u t of c o n t r o l , c r o s s e d i n t o t h e west l a n e , c a u s i n g t h e Hathaway c a r t o s t r i k e i t . There was no testimony e l i c i t e d from any w i t n e s s which c o n c l u s i v e l y put t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k i n t h e westbound l a n e of t r a f f i c . The c l o s e s t testimony was a l e a d i n g q u e s t i o n asked by p l a i n t i f f s ' a t t o r n e y t o John Esp: 11 Q. He [ B a i n t e r ] turned t o t h e r i g h t , b u t t h e back end went t o t h e l e f t a s he e i t h e r turned o r skidded, i s n ' t t h a t c o r r e c t ? A . Yes. I I The i n v e s t i g a t i n g highway patrolman t e s t i f i e d t h a t because of t h e l o c a t i o n of t h e d e b r i s a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t , he had no doubt t h a t t h e a c c i d e n t occurred i n t h e westbound l a n e . ~ e f e n d a n t ' st h e o r y , obviously t h e t h e o r y b e l i e v e d by t h e j u r y , comes p r i m a r i l y from t h e testimony of Lyle Ehlke who was following t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k a t t h e time of t h e a c c i d e n t . Ehlke and h i s w i f e a t t h e time of t h e a c c i d e n t were e n r o u t e t o Minnesota from Washington. accident. They knew no one involved i n t h e Ehlke t o l d t h e highway patrolman t h a t a w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon had passed him j u s t p r i o r t o t h e a c c i d e n t , proceeded down t h e road and s t r u c k t h e s i d e of t h e Hathaway v e h i c l e , c a u s i n g i t t o v e e r and s t r i k e ~ a i n t e r ' st r u c k . Ehlke and t h e highway patrolman i n v e s t i g a t e d t h e l e f t s i d e of t h e Hathaway c a r a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t and found o n l y a small s c r a t c h on t h e l e f t s i d e , which was n o t a new mark. A t t r i a l , Ehlke t e s t i f i e d t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon passed on t h e l e f t s i d e of t h e Hathaway c a r and s t r u c k t h e l e f t s i d e of t h e Hathaway v e h i c l e , c a u s i n g i t t o v e e r and c o l l i d e w i t h t h e r e a r end of t h e B a i n t e r c a t t l e truck. There i s some c o n f l i c t a s t o which s i d e of t h e Hathaway v e h i c l e Ehlke t o l d t h e i n v e s t i g a t i n g highway patrolman t h a t t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon s t r u c k . the right side. The highway patrolman claims i t was Ehlke maintains i t was t h e l e f t s i d e , even though t h e y i n v e s t i g a t e d b o t h s i d e s of t h e Hathaway v e h i c l e . P l a i n t i f f s contend Ehlke ' s testimony i s h i g h l y improbable, i n c r e d i b l e , and i n h e r e n t l y impossible and c l a i m t h a t t h i s Court ought t o d i s r e g a r d i t i n i t s c o n s i d e r a t i o n , c i t i n g a s a u t h o r i t y Casey v. Northern P a c i f i c Ry. Co., 60 Mont. 56, 68, 198 P. 141, and , q u o t e : II The r u l e h a s been s t a t e d r e p e a t e d l y i n t h i s j u r i s d i c t i o n t h a t a c o u r t may r e j e c t t h e most p o s i t i v e testimony, though t h e w i t n e s s be n o t d i s c r e d i t e d by d i r e c t evidence impeaching him o r c o n t r a d i c t i n g h i s s t a t e m e n t s . The i n h e r e n t i m p r o b a b i l i t y o f h i s s t o r y may deny i t a l l claims t o r e s p e c t . " (Emphasis added. ) P l a i n t i f f s p o i n t out t h a t t h e two s t o r i e s r e l a t e d by Ehlke a r e c o n t r a d i c t o r y and n o t worthy of b e l i e f f o r i t i s s o obviously c o n t r a r y t o t h e testimony o f t h e o t h e r w i t n e s s e s . This Court cannot a g r e e . W find there i s sufficient e evidence t o support t h e v e r d i c t . P l a i n t i f f s p o i n t out t h a t Mrs. Ehlke, a s a passenger i n t h e Ehlke v e h i c l e , saw t h e a c c i d e n t between t h e Hathaway c a r and the Bainter truck. s t a t i o n wagon. They c l a i m t h a t s h e d i d n o t s e e a second w h i t e With good v i s i b i l i t y t o t h e l e f t and f r o n t , Ronning d i d n o t s e e a second w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon. Esp, who was looking n o r t h t o t h e f r o n t and r e a r of t h e Ronning c a r , d i d n o t s e e a second w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon. B a i n t e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t he d i d n o t s e e a w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon come from t h e r e a r , pass ~ h l k e ' spickup, t r a v e l down t h e c e n t e r l i n e of t h e highway and pass between t h e Kathaway c a r and h i s c a t t l e t r u c k . P l a i n t i f f s maintain t h a t had t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon done what Ehlke claimed i t d i d , s u r e l y t h e s e people would have seen i t also. However, t h e r e i s testimony which t e n d s t o e x p l a i n why no one e l s e saw t h e a c c i d e n t , and which c o r r o b o r a t e s ~ h l k e ' ss t o r y . ~ o n n i n g ' s testimony under cross-examination concerning t h e a c c i d e n t and t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon was: "Q. But you d o n ' t know on which s i d e of t h e road i t [ ~ a i n t e r ' st r u c k ] was on? A . That i s t h e q u e s t i o n t h a t i s hard f o r m t o answer. e You saw t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k t u r n i n g toward t h e r i g h t toward t h e d i t c h ? A.. He was zigzagging, and then he come around l i k e t h a t . "Q. And headed toward t h e d i t c h t h e n ? A . When he come around l i k e t h a t I heard t h e c r a s h . That i s when t h e a c c i d e n t happened. "Q. "Q. Again, you d o n ' t know where t h e impact was i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e westbound l a n e ? A . I wish I could s a y where i t was, b u t I mean, i t was behind me. And I was busy t r y i n g t o g e t m c a r - - - t o keep from t i p p i n g y t h i s c a r over I was d r i v i n g . I d o n ' t want t o be wrong w i t h anybody. "Q. Regarding t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon t h a t M r . Pohlman was q u e s t i o n i n g you a b o u t , you c a n ' t say t h a t t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon d i d n ' t pass t h a t a r e a ? A. No, I c a n ' t . I t could have. I have thought of i t f o r s i x months." M r . ~ o n n i n g ' sconcern over being involved i n an a c c i d e n t , and being i n t h e process of t u r n i n g , e x p l a i n s why he might have f a i l e d t o s e e any w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon. John Esp, t h e passenger i n t h e Ronning c a r , t e s t i f i e d t h a t he t o o f a i l e d t o s e e a w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon l e a v i n g t h e scene of t h e a c c i d e n t , b u t a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t h i s a t t e n t i o n was d i r e c t e d t o t h e r e a r when t h e a c c i d e n t occurred, and he d i d n o t s e e t h e a c c i d e n t a c t u a l l y occur. B a i n t e r t e s t i f i e d he d i d n o t s e e t h e white s t a t i o n wagon u n t i l he g o t out o f h i s t r u c k a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t , and saw a w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon proceeding down t h e road. He also testified that because he was t u r n i n g h i s t r u c k toward t h e d i t c h when t h e a c c i d e n t happened t h a t he would have been unable t o s e e t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon. Mrs. Ehlke, who was r i d i n g i n t h e pickup w i t h h e r husband, s a i d she d i d n o t s e e t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon, b u t d i d t e s t i f y t h a t j u s t p r i o r t o t h e a c c i d e n t she d i d h e a r something. O direct n examination by d e f e n d a n t ' s a t t o r n e y Mrs. Ehlke t e s t i f i e d : J u s t p r i o r t o t h e impact d i d you s e e o r h e a r "Q. A,. Yes. Something went anything e l s e o t h e r than y r i g h t by t h e t r u c k . And I s a i d t o m husband, I s a i d , what was t h a t . -- "Q. A. ' Q When you s a y went by t h e t r u c k , you mean your t r u c k ? Yes. Went r i g h t by. Was t h i s a sound t h a t you heard? A. Yes. "Q. Was t h e sound going from back t o f r o n t o r f r o n t It was coming from t h e back t o t h e f r o n t . t o back? A . H w long a f t e r you heard t h a t sound d i d you s e e o "Q. t h i s impact? A . Right a f t e r . "Q. Did you e v e r a c t u a l l y s e e a n y t h i n g pass you, yours e l f ? A . No. ' 1 Again no d i r e c t testimony concerning t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon, b u t testimony which l e n d s c r e d i b i l i t y t o M r . ~ h l k e ' ss t o r y . More s u p p o r t i n g testimony comes from Doug Solberg, a s t u d e n t from Montana S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , who was d r i v i n g w e l l behind t h e people involved i n t h e a c c i d e n t , a t t h e time i t occurred. His testimony e s t a b l i s h e s t h e r e was a n o t h e r w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon. Solberg t e s t i f i e d t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon followed him f o r a l e n g t h of time and then passed him. There i s c o n f l i c t i n g t e s t i - mony between Ehlke and Solberg a s t o t h e number of passengers i n t h e w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon. The i n v e s t i g a t i n g highway patrolman, Clarence Owen, t e s t i f i e d he had no doubt t h a t t h e a c c i d e n t occurred i n t h e westbound l a n e of t r a f f i c , and t h a t t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k swerved i n t o t h a t l a n e causing t h e a c c i d e n t . This he a s c e r t a i n e d from l o c a t i o n of t h e d e b r i s of t h e wreck s c a t t e r e d on t h e highway. However, t h e r e was testimony e l i c i t e d from O f f i c e r Owen showing t h a t he f a i l e d t o q u e s t i o n anyone a s t o t h e removal o f d e b r i s from t h e eastbound l a n e of t r a f f i c b e f o r e h i s a r r i v a l a t t h e scene of t h e a c c i d e n t around 7:30 p.m., a c c i d e n t occurred. approximately 20-25 minutes a f t e r t h e O f f i c e r Owen a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h a t he r a d i o e d t o Big Timber f o r law enforcement o f f i c i a l s t o be on t h e lookout f o r t h e d e s c r i b e d w h i t e s t a t i o n wagon, w i t h n e g a t i v e r e s u l t s . But, t h e r a d i o c a l l was n o t t r a n s m i t t e d u n t i l some 40 minutes a f t e r t h e a c c i d e n t occurred. O f f i c e r Owen t e s t i f i e d he doubted t h a t t h r e e c a r s could pass simultaneously on t h e highway, although he admitted he had f a i l e d t o measure t h e width of t h e highway and r e c o r d i t . Another w i t n e s s , D r . Drumheller, a physics p r o f e s s o r from Montana S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , t e s t i f i e d t h a t he had measured t h e width of t h e road and found i t t o b e 32 f e e t , t h e o r e t i c a l l y wide enough f o r t h e t h r e e c a r s i n q u e s t i o n t o have passed simultaneously. D r . Drum- h e l l e r f u r t h e r t e s t i f i e d t h a t i t was conceivable t h e a c c i d e n t could have occurred between t h e Hathaway c a r and t h e B a i n t e r t r u c k a t a minimum a n g l e of 22 d e g r e e s , b u t t h e d o c t o r could n o t s a y f o r s u r e on which s i d e of t h e highway t h e a c c i d e n t occurred. Dr. Drumheller a l s o t e s t i f i e d t h e Hathaway c a r , a f t e r t h e impact, could have been thrown sideways, which would e x p l a i n why it was l o c a t e d i n t h e westbound l a n e heading s t r a i g h t down t h e road. A thorough review of t h e r e c o r d r e v e a l s t h e r e was c r e d i b l e evidence s u p p o r t i n g both t h e o r i e s of how t h e a c c i d e n t occurred. T h e r e f o r e , t h e j u r y d i d n o t r e n d e r a v e r d i c t which was c o n t r a r y t o t h e g r e a t weight of t h e evidence. But, t o t h e con- t r a r y , t h e v e r d i c t i s supported by s u b s t a n t i a l c r e d i b l e evidence. A s t o whether t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t e r r e d i n denying p l a i n t i f f s ' motion f o r a new t r i a l , t h i s Court has h e l d t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t has broad d i s c r e t i o n t o g r a n t o r r e f u s e t o g r a n t a new t r i a l and w i l l n o t b e r e v e r s e d on a p p e a l except f o r a manifest abuse of t h a t d i s c r e t i o n . Johnson v. Whitcomb, 149 Mont. 23, 422 P.2d 642; Tigh v. College Park R e a l t y Co., 149 Mont. 358, 427 Where t h e r e i s s u b s t a n t i a l c r e d i b l e evidence t o support P. 2d 57. t h e v e r d i c t i t i s n o t e r r o r f o r t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t t o deny a motion f o r a new t r i a l . Davis v. Smith, 152 Mont, 170, 448 P.2d 133; Kincheloe v. Rygg, 152 Mont. 187, 448 P.2d 140; Heen v. Tiddy, 151 Mont. 265, 442 P.2d 434. T h i s Court having found s u b s t a n t i a l c r e d i b l e evidence t o s u p p o r t t h e j u r y v e r d i c t f i n d s no abuse of d i s c r e t i o n o r e r r o r on t h e p a r t of t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t i n denying t h e motion f o r a new t r i a l . The judgment of t h e d i s t r i c t cou affirmed. 4 --------W Concur: e Chief J u s t i c e Mr. Justice John Conway Harrison dissenting: I dissent.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.