Court Opinion

ID: 9830573
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 20:17:37.897343+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:24.427337
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
Appellant in his motion for a rehearing insists that the evidence in the record shows only an ordinary negligent act, that of driving on the left-hand side of the highway; that there is no evidence to show a “heedless or reckless disregard of the rights of others” within the meaning of the guest statute of .this state; and that to show liability of Dr. Hamilton the evidence must show more than the negligent act of driving his car on the wrong side of the highway in violation of the law.
We think the motion states a correct proposition of law. The difficulty we find is that the issue of the “heedless” driving of the automobile is an issue of fact and the trial court in overruling the plea necessarily found that the driving of the au*850tomobile, under the evidence, was “heedless.” The issue was primarily, with the trial court on the hearing of the plea. The trial court evidently was of the opinion that the appellee had made out a prima facie case. 'We thought, and still think, that the issue of the “heedless” driving of the automobile should be tried and determined on a trial on the merits rather than on a hearing on the plea.
The motion is overruled,