Ison v. Mullins

8 Citing cases

  1. Weitzel v. Wingard

    274 Or. 185 (Or. 1976)   Cited 11 times
    Holding that the defendant's excuse that he was on the wrong side of the road because of the defective condition of his vehicle was sufficient for jury consideration; the evidence permitted the jury to find that the defendant was not at fault for the defective condition

    Such a rule is also consistent with holdings by other courts in cases involving vehicle defects, and without regard to whether or not such defects were of such a nature as to violate vehicle equipment statutes. Thus, in Ison v. Mullins, 336 S.W.2d 599 (Ky App 1960), in which defendant's car also went across the center line and hit plaintiff's car, defendant said, as in this case, that "Something went wrong with my car, and I couldn't control it" and contended that "if something was wrong with the car [he] was not guilty of negligence." That contention was rejected, the court saying (at 601):

  2. Springfield Coal Company v. Meade

    447 S.W.2d 86 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969)

    While it is doubtful that any one of the factors above enumerated, standing alone, would be sufficient to destroy the probative value of the Lemaster-Meade testimony, their cumulative effect is more than sufficient for that purpose. Cf. Ison v. Mullins, Ky., 336 S.W.2d 599; Ashland Oil Refining Co. v. Brashear, Ky., 251 S.W.2d 288. It is our opinion that the evidence did not warrant a verdict for the plaintiffs, and that the trial court erred in overruling the defendants' motions for a directed verdict and for judgment n. o. v.

  3. Roland v. Beckham

    408 S.W.2d 628 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966)   Cited 16 times

    Other testimony of the witness lends support to the fact that the foregoing statement of Ferrell was made within less than five minutes after the accident occurred. Appellants Roland and Board of Education urge that the statement made by Ferrell was admissible as part of the res gestae, and cite Ison v. Mullins, Ky., 336 S.W.2d 599 in support of their contention. The appellees counter by calling attention to Honaker v. Crutchfield, 247 Ky. 495, 57 S.W.2d 502, and Cumberland Gasoline Corporation v. Fields' Adm'r, 258 Ky. 417, 80 S.W.2d 28. For appellees it is urged that Ferrell's statement was in response to interrogation, and thus lost its spontaneity.

  4. Quackenbush v. Lamker

    398 S.W.2d 875 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966)

    This is an automobile accident case in which the jury found for the defendants and the plaintiffs contend they were entitled to a directed verdict and a judgment n.o.v. because the physical facts are conclusive in their favor. Cf. Crain v. Jones, Ky., 390 S.W.2d 640 (1965); Ison v. Mullins, Ky., 336 S.W.2d 599 (1960); Silver Fleet Motor Express v. Wilson, 291 Ky. 509, 165 S.W.2d 48 (1942). We are unable to accede to that viewpoint.

  5. Railway Express Agency, Inc., v. Warfield

    386 S.W.2d 453 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965)

    The debris in the road and the testimony of the disinterested eyewitness are not conclusive. In Ison v. Mullins, Ky., 336 S.W.2d 599 (1960), and Thornberry v. Smith, Ky., 346 S.W.2d 727 (1961), physical evidence was held conclusive against equivocal testimony to the contrary. Tire marks were vital in each instance, whereas the principal physical evidence in this case is the position of the debris, a less probative circumstance.

  6. GULLION v. EWRY

    384 S.W.2d 315 (Ky. Ct. App. 1964)   Cited 1 times

    The verdict will not be disturbed. Stewart v. Sizemore, Ky., 306 S.W.2d 821; Fields v. Baker, Ky., 329 S.W.2d 376. The physical fact that the cars collided or came to rest on the berm of the highway is not sufficient to require a directed verdict in view of all of the testimony in the case. Ison v. Mullins, Ky., 336 S.W.2d 599. Judgment affirmed.

  7. Greyhound Corporation v. Allen

    353 S.W.2d 558 (Ky. Ct. App. 1962)   Cited 3 times

    Such evidence simply could not induce conviction in reasonable minds, and under the authority of Central Lumber Company v. Sparks' Adm'r, Ky., 296 S.W.2d 453, would not authorize the submission of this issue of negligence to the jury. See also Ison v. Mullins, Ky., 336 S.W.2d 599. There is an additional reason why Adams' statement concerning the position of his truck at the time of impact does not establish actionable negligence on the part of defendant.

  8. Thornberry v. Smith

    346 S.W.2d 727 (Ky. Ct. App. 1961)   Cited 6 times

    It is our opinion that the evidence with respect to the tire tracks conclusively establishes that the Smith car, and not the truck, was on the wrong side of the road, and that this evidence destroys the evidentiary value of the testimony of the plaintiffs' witnesses to the contrary. Ample precedent for this holding is found in Ison v. Mullins, Ky., 336 S.W.2d 599 (and cases therein cited); Ashland Oil Refining Co. v. Brashear, Ky., 251 S.W.2d 288; and Stark's Adm'x v. Herndon's Adm'r, 292 Ky. 469, 166 S.W.2d 828. The judgments are reversed (the motions for appeal being sustained as to the three judgments here on motion) with directions that judgments be entered for the defendant in accordance with his motion for judgments notwithstanding the verdict.