Opinion ID: 1564079
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Did the trial court err in entering a summary judgment in favor of Hyde on Gracie's negligence claim against Hyde?

Text: Gracie contends that Hyde was negligent in failing to see Evelyn Van Voorst's automobile before the collision or in failing to take evasive action to avoid the collision. (Gracie's brief at 32.) Immediately before the accident, Hyde was traveling west on Highway 36 while Evelyn Van Voorst was driving south on Freeman Avenue in Morgan County. Hyde was traveling at 40-50 m.p.h., within the established speed limit of 55 m.p.h. Cpl. White, the state trooper who investigated the accident, testified that this was a reasonable speed for the misty weather conditions. Hyde was driving on a main thoroughfare; Evelyn Van Voorst was entering Highway 36 from a side street, which had a stop sign at its intersection with Highway 36. The accident report lists the vehicle Evelyn Van Voorst was driving as unit 1, and the vehicle Hyde was driving as unit 2. The accident report states that unit 1 pulled into the intersection failing to yield right of way to unit 2. In fact, there was testimony indicating that unit 1 never stopped for the stop sign but rolled right through it. In her deposition, when asked if Evelyn Van Voorst stopped at the stop sign, Gracie stated: No. When asked, But as far as you know, that's what happened. She didn't come up to the stop sign and stop. She pulled into Highway 36 even though she couldn't see if the road coming to her left was clear? Gracie Van Voorst answered yes. Thus, there is no evidence of negligence on Hyde's part. The trial court did not err in granting Hyde's motion for a summary judgment.