Tort Law

Brien Roche Law > Tort Law Resources > Tort Case Law > Tort Law Cases – S > Stopping Distance Cases Summarized By Personal Injury Lawyer

Stopping Distance Cases Summarized By Personal Injury Lawyer

Fairfax Injury Lawyer Brien Roche Summarizes Stopping Distance Cases

Brien Roche

This page within Virginia Tort Case Law is a compilation of cases reported by the Virginia Supreme Court and summarized by Brien Roche dealing with the topic of Stopping Distance. For more information about stopping distance issues see the pages on Wikipedia. 


Stopping Distance-Statutes

See Va. Code § 46.2-880 as to table of speed and stopping distances.

Stopping Distance-Cases

1989 Swiney v. Overby, 237 Va. 231, 377 S.E.2d 372.

Necessary predicate for admissibility of expert testimony on stopping distance is condition of brakes of vehicle.

1982 Johnson v. Haas, 224 Va. 245, 295 S.E.2d 789.

Proof of all factors enunciated in statute is required as foundation before any instruction based on tables of vehicle speed and stopping distances can be presented to jury.

1976 Bunn v. Norfolk F. & D. Ry., 217 Va. 45, 225 S.E.2d 375.

Evidence was clear that train was operated well within speed limit. Granting of instructions on tables of speed and stopping distances discouraged unless instruction is clearly supported by evidence.

1972 Vanlandingham v. Vanlandingham, 212 Va. 856, 188 S.E.2d 96.

Virginia law does not impose duty on operator to be able to stop his car within his range of vision.

1970 Yates v. Potts, 210 Va. 636, 172 S.E.2d 784.

Plaintiff not required to drive at such speed as to be able to stop within his range of vision.

1969 Terry v. Fagan, 209 Va. 642, 166 S.E.2d 254.

Plaintiff guest injured when defendant driver burned himself with cigarette ash and took hands off wheel, vehicle left highway, and struck tree. Question of speed not determined; plaintiff requested and received instructions on “Tables of Speed and Stopping Distance.” Defendant objected, stating that he did not attempt to stop vehicle, so tables were inapplicable. Error, if any, was harmless.

1968 White v. Hunt, 209 Va. 11, 161 S.E.2d 809.

Not error to allow jury to take tables of speeds and stopping distances into jury room. Possible objections to such are discussed. Tables should not have been offered into evidence without instruction as to their relevance.

1966 Cook v. Basnight, 207 Va. 491, 151 S.E.2d 408.

Defendant struck plaintiff’s vehicle in intersection when defendant’s brakes failed and emergency brake failed to stop car in time. Table of speed and stopping distances could not be used without also instructing jury of various other factors, such as time at which, and force with which, he applied brakes.

1966 Shelton v. Mullins, 207 Va. 17, 147 S.E.2d 754.

Tables of speed and stopping distances admitted with instruction that tables were result of experiments made with motor vehicles, unloaded except for driver, equipped with four wheel brakes, in good condition. Instruction without evidence to support it; harmless error, however. No evidence as to when defendant applied brakes and type of brakes.

1966 Finch v. McRae, 206 Va. 917, 147 S.E.2d 83.

There is no duty to drive at such speed as to be able to stop within limit of driver’s vision.

1965 Beasley v. Bosschermuller, 206 Va. 360, 143 S.E.2d 881.

Table of speed and stopping distance may be incorporated injury instruction.

1960 Beasley v. Barnes, 201 Va. 593, 113 S.E.2d 62.

Table of stopping distance not applicable to motorcycles.

1959 Norfolk & W. Ry. v. Hagy, 201 Va. 183, 110 S.E.2d 177.

It is common knowledge that at five to six mph, vehicle can be stopped almost instantly.

1952 Clayton v. Taylor, 193 Va. 555, 69 S.E.2d 424.

Opinion question as to whether driver had time to stop his car at speed he was going was improper.

Contact Us For A Free Consultation

Stopping Distance Cases Summarized By Personal Injury Lawyer

Contact Us For A Free Consultation

    Contact Us For A Free Consultation