OCR Text |
Show THE DAILY PAGE FOUR In The Supreme Court Of The State Of Utah Lloyd V. Pyne, Plaintiff and Respondent, No. 11999 FILED v. January 26, ..Earl N. Dorius, Director of The Driver License Division, Utah State Department. of Public Safety, - Defendant and Appellant, 1971 L. M. Cummings,. Clerk . TUCKETT, Justice; a After a revocation of the plaintiff's driver's license he was granted restricted license which limited his right to operate a vehicle except to and from his place of employment. After receiving the restricted license in April, 1969, the plaintiff was convicted of operating a vehicle while under the influence of intoxicating liquor on October 17, 1969, and again on December 3, 1969. After a hearing, the defendant revoked restricted license. After the revocation by the defendant, the plaintiff filed these' proceed- -' ings in the district court seeking a restoration or the issuance of a restricted license. After a hearing by the court, the court issued its order directing the defendant to issue to the plaintiff a restricted license. From the order of the court, the defendant has appealed to this court. The statute we are here concerned with is Section 1953, as amended, which provides as follows: 41 -2- 8(d), U.'C.'A. -1 County, and the South Summit Fire protection District then ceased to operate. Citiaens of the Town of Kamas thereafter formed a voluntary fire protection organisation which elected its own officers and was not responsible in any manner to any of the named defendants. It had an ambulance, a tank truck, and a pumper truck which were used if, as, and when the need arose.' The vehicles w ere stored in a building owned by Summit County and the Town of Kamas under an arrangement not clearly established but which may be assumed to be joint ownership. There were four stalls and an office in the building. No employees were stationed at the building, and volunteer firemen came when summoned to duty. only ..... r .Summit County provided some funds for the operation of the voluntary association but required no accounting for the money spent and received no reports of any activity of the organisation. The Town of Kamas had no connection whatsoever with the voluntary fire department except that it had some ownership in the building. . Six of the 23 volunteer firemen were members of the Kamas Valley Lions Club, a service club located in the Town of Kamas. That club convehicle decorated for parade purposes and structed a float, a a of being drawn by truck or car. The club intended to use the float capable in future parades; and in order to preserve it, they asked the chief of the voluntary fire association for permission to store it in an empty stall at the firehouse. ' No rental was to be charged for this accommodation, and none was paid. The plaintiff is a member of the Heber Valley Lions Club, located in the. Town of Heber in an adjoining county. The officers of this club paid to the Kamas Valley Lions Club the sum of $50 for the use of the float to be used in a parade in Heber. No officer of either of the defendants knew anything at all about the arrangement made by the two clubs, nor did the chief of the volunteer fire association know anything about it or give permission for. the removal of the float. four-wheel- ed The plaintiff was directed by the officers of his club to go to Kamas He took his two children with him, entered the office, the stall wherein the float was stored, and walked into the passed through 1. Charlton v. Hackett. 11 Utah 2d 389, 360 P. 2d 176 (1961). - recommendation of the trial judge in any case where a person is convicted of any of the crimes referred to in this section, the department division of drivers' licenses may at its discretion. extend to such person the limited privilege of driving a vehicle to and from his place of employment or within other proper limits; provided, however, that this discretion shall be limited to cases where undue hardship would result from a failure to extend such privilege,, and providing further that this extension of privilege shall be extended only once to any individual. (Emphasis added. ) On -- J and get the float. one where the pumper truck was located. While there, he slipped and fell, sustaining personal injuries which arc the basis of this action. There was believable testimony that the plaintiff went into the pumper show his children the fire engine. There was a preponderance of to stall the evidence that the defendant slipped in a thin layer of water on the cement floor and that had he looked, he would have seen it. The plain language of the statute makes it discretionary with the department to grant, if it sees fit, a limited privilege of driving a vehicle. The record before us indicates that the only evidence offered by the plaintiff in 'support of his petition in the district court was the recommendation of the trial judge in whose court the plaintiff was convicted of driving while under the' influence of intoxicating liquor. This is insufficient to show that the defendant abused his dis- There was no evidence of any negligence on the part of anybody in permitting the water to be on the floor. There was evidence that all pumpers drain water after use and refill and that wet fire hoses continue to drain for some time after use. The trial judge was concerned about any legal theory upon which the defendants could be held liable even if it had been shown that there was negligence, and we share that same concern. At best, plaintiff was a mere licensee in entering the stall to get the float. He was a trespasser in the stall where the pumper was stored. cretion in failing to grant to the plaintiff a limited driver's permit. The decision of the district court is reversed. VV!i;V -- V:;:. WE CONCUR: :41';rii;-- E. R. Callister, '' " Jr., No '. v MONDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1971 IICOIO casts awarded. ' ' i.v- ' - The plaintiff contends that the duty which a landowner owes to others Should be the same whether the other be a guest, business invitee, licensee, Chief Justice or trespasser, to wit: reasonable care under the circumstances. '"; We do not agree with this contention. We think a landlord fulfills his a he when to or refrains licensee from wilfully causing injuries to duty guest the guest or licensee or from permitting conditions to exist from which he reasonably should foresee that injury might result. He owes no duties to a trespasser other than to refrain from wilfully inflicting injuries upon him. Intruders who come upon theland of another without his approval have no right to. demand that the landowner provide them a safe place to trespass. They must assume the risks incident to the property as used by the landlord and are expected to look out for themselves. ' F. Henri Henriod, Justice J. Allan Crockett, Justice ELLETT. Justice: (Concurring) , concur but wish to make clear that in this case the defendant lias no discretion to grant another restricted license to the plaintiff. The statute iTjhat this extension of privilege shall be extended only provides: once to any individual. " I think it means that when a license is revoked, the department has a discretion to extend or not to extend a limited privilege to drive a car. However, once that privilege has been extended, and the driver again does something justifying the cancellation of his driver's license, then the department cannot during the period of suspension grant further restricted driving privileges to him. I "... While the original revocation was in force and effect, the plaintiff was herein twice convicted of crimes requiring cancellation of his driving privileges. The defendant was, therefore, without discretion to grant a further restricted driving privilege to the plaintiff, and the court erred in ordering that he do so. We conclude that the trial court would have been justified in believing that none of the defendants was chargeable with the arrangements made by the Kamas Valley Lions Club with the voluntary fire department or with the arrangements between the two service clubs; that no one was negligent in permitting water to be under and around the pumper truck; and that no one owed any duty to the plaintiff to keep that particular stall dry. He also could have found the plaintiff to be contributorily negligent. His order dismissing the complaint is amply sustained by the evidence and is hereby affirmed. No costs are awarded. WE CONCUR: . E. R. Callister, need now now decide whether the statute permits only one extensior of privilege during the entire life of an individual. It is sufficient to say that the defendant cannot grant a second one to this plaintiff under the facts of this We Harold A. Schlueter, v. Summit County, Town of Kamas, and the South Summit County Fire Protection District, Defendants and Respondents. F. Henri Henriod, Justice No'. 11970 FILED January 27, Chief Justice R. L. Tuckett, Justice case. Plaintiff and Appellant, Jr., 1971 L. M. Cummings, Clerk J. Allan Crockett, Justice 2. Wood v. Wood, 8 Utah 2d 279. 33 P. 2d 630 (1959). 3. Prosser, Law of Torts, Hornbrook Series (3d Ed. ), Sec. 58. ELLETT, Justice: This is an appeal from a dismissal of the case after all of the evidence was in. The trial of the matter was to the court, sitting withbut a jury, and so the dismissal is to be treated as if a judgment of no cause of action had been rendered in favor of the defendants. Therefore, if there is competent evidence to sustain the ruling under applicable principles of law, we should affirm the trial court. Trust Deeds 224 1081 E Mingo View 227 There is very little dispute in the facts as revealed by the evidence, Bk 1081 237 .tripp etux to let Seo Pioneer Title Ins $12000. B Mingo Charles V $3149.08 6515 W 3785 So, ftitr Alvin J Billings etux to PFSi H5900. SLCb 266 LudtU P Pi arson etux to Murray Th Kay M Lewis; $3372.70 1st 81 W5750 So View At, Sandy Johnson etux to Valley Bk 239 At, Sandy Stephen L St and substantially they are as follows: The South Summit Fire protection District was organised' pursuant to statute and had the right to levy taxes for the expenses of operation.' About 12 or 15 years ago a fire protection district was organized for all of Summit Stephen L Tripp etux to 1st SEc St Bk Pioneer Title Ins; $12000. 268 Lawrence W Qllbert etux to Lookhart W.st St 3568 So 4800 W Title The $8379.60 |