Radcliffe v. Texas Supply Co.

Henderson, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. Keith B. Radcliffe, Jr., seventeen years of age, was seriously injured on August 13, 1947, when the motor-scooter he was operating collided with a tractor-trailer at the intersection of York Road and Belvedere Avenue in Baltimore City. Suits were instituted in Baltimore County by Keith B. Radcliffe, Sr., as his father and next friend, and individually, to recover damages for the injuries and losses sustained. The case was tried before a jury.

At the close of the testimony the court refused motions for directed verdicts. The jury, however, found verdicts for the defendants. The infant plaintiff was proceeding north on York Road at a speed of about 25 miles an hour at 7:20 in the morning of a clear, dry day, on his way to work at Tow-son. York Road is about 50 feet wide, with double street car tracks in the center, sunk in the asphalt.

Belvedere Avenue is 36 feet wide. The intersection is at right angles, and there is a traffic light in the center. When he was about 150 feet from the intersection he saw a tractor-trailer, bound south on York Road, stopped north of the traffic light in the southbound car tracks. He could not remember seeing the driver signaling for a left turn, as the driver testified he did, but he knew ¹²⁰ at that time that the driver intended to make a left turn into Belvedere Avenue.

The light turned green, and he saw the tractor-trailer start to make the turn. He thought it was going to stop, “it paused momentarily.” He did not put on his brakes until he was at the intersection. He swerved to the left, 1 to 4 feet, but struck the right rear wheel of the trailer, about 2 feet from its rear. It was shown that the tractor-trailer was 29% feet long, and that the point of impact was 15 feet south of the north curb line of Belvedere Avenue and 7 feet west of the east curb line of York Road.

At the moment of impact the tractor, and half the trailer were past the east curb line of York Road. It was moving slowly, in second gear, and covered a distance of about 40 feet after it began the turn, at a speed of 4 or 5 miles per hour. The infant plaintiff admitted after the accident that it was his fault, saying that his brakes did not work and he could not stop or swerve into the unobstructed portion of the lane. He had a “learner’s card” to operate the scooter, which he had purchased two weeks before the accident.

The court gave an elaborate and careful charge to the jury, with particular reference to the rules as to right of way. No objection was taken to this part of the charge, but counsel for the appellants stated: “I submit that the jury should be advised that the operator [of the tractor-trailer] in making a left hand turn should go to the right of the center of the road”. The court replied: “I do not think that has any application to the facts in this case.” The appellants contend that the court erred in refusing to make the charge requested, and that the undisputed physical facts show that the driver of the