Brian Swanson v. Cheryl Buettner, 2011 SKPC 122

IN THE PROVINCIAL COURT OF SASKATCHEWAN CIVIL DIVISION Citation: 2011 SKPC 122 Date: July 26, 2011 File: 20-11 Location: Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan _____________________________________________________________________________ Between: Brian Swanson and Cheryl Buettner - and - Anthony Ian Danskin Self For the Plaintiffs Self For the Defendant _____________________________________________________________________________ DECISION M.T.

GORDON , J _____________________________________________________________________________ [ 1 ] The Plaintiffs claim against Anthony Ian Danskin for the deductible in the amount of $250.00 as a result of an accident that occurred January 13, 2011, in Moose Jaw. [ 2 ] The Plaintiff, Cheryl Buettner, was driving a 2005 Toyota about 5:10 p.m. in a back alley between 3 rd and 4 th Avenue, in Moose Jaw. She testified she was driving slowly and near the alley exit onto 4 th Avenue.

[ 3 ] The Defendant’s vehicle came on an angle towards her. The Defendant’s vehicle was heading into the alley and in her path. She could not get out of the way as there was a brick storage building to her right. Due to the slippery surface she could not stop. The driver’s side left fender of her vehicle came into contact with the front driver’s side and door of the Defendant’s vehicle. [ 4 ] According to the Plaintiff, they drove the short distance to her house to exchange information.

The Plaintiff filed pictures and a sketch of the accident. [ 5 ] The Defendant, Anthony Ian Danskin, was driving south on 4 th Avenue in his 2002 Pontiac Grand Am. Mr. Danskin realized he could not make a left-hand turn at the end of 4 th because of the Manitoba Street Expressway. [ 6 ] As a result, Mr. Danskin signalled to make a left-hand turn, east into the alley between 3 rd and 4 th Avenue. [ 7 ] Mr. Danskin noticed a truck coming behind him so he pulled over slightly so he was more in the centre of 4 th Avenue.

The truck then passed on his right. [ 8 ] The Defendant testified that at this point the Plaintiff’s vehicle slid into him.

The accident happened on 4 th Avenue, not in the alley. [ 9 ] On cross-examination, the Defendant agreed his vehicle may have been on a right angle, but maintained the Plaintiff’s vehicle “T-boned” him. [ 10 ] The Defendant states they spoke to each other right there, and exchanged information. [ 11 ] The parties agreed that 4 th Avenue was heavily snow packed and the alley was pure ice but fairly smooth. [ 12 ] The Defendant had two passengers with him, but did not ask them to testify as each had started new employment out of the city. [ 13 ] In closing argument, the Plaintiff submitted that the Defendant entered the alleyway before it was safe to do so.

She claims if the accident happened as described by the Defendant, the damage on the vehicles would be different. [ 14 ] The Defendant stated the Plaintiff slid into her, while he was waiting to turn left into the alley. ANALYSIS [ 15 ] Each party claims it was the other driver’s fault that caused the accident. Both parties agree as to the time of the accident and road conditions. The Plaintiff states the accident occurred at the entrance of the back alley, the Defendant’s vehicle being on an angle and driving right in front of her.

The Defendant contests that the Plaintiff slid into him on 4 th Avenue, the vehicles being perpendicular to each other.

[ 16 ] The Plaintiff’s vehicle was damaged on the front driver’s side. The Defendant’s vehicle is dented on the front driver’s side and along the driver’s door. The photographs, P4, show the damage on each vehicle. [ 17 ] The Plaintiff was driving in an alleyway and nearing the exit onto 4 th Avenue. She claims the accident occurred in the alleyway. The Defendant claims that he was in the centre of 4 th Avenue waiting to turn into the alley when the Plaintiff’s vehicle slid into his vehicle. [ 18 ] There is no doubt that it was winter driving conditions.

The Plaintiff was exiting the alley when she saw the Defendant’s vehicle on 4 th Avenue. The Plaintiff was not able to stop and slid into the Defendant’s vehicle causing the damage as depicted in Exhibit P4. I find that the Defendant’s vehicle was at a slight angle (he admitted this was a possibility). [ 19 ] The Plaintiff has the burden to establish negligence on the part of the Defendant on the civil burden. [ 20 ] I find it more likely the accident occurred as the Defendant described.

The nature and location of the damages is more consistent with the Defendant’s version. [ 21 ] Section 219(6) of The Traffic Safety Act, s.s. 2004, C.

T-18.1 , states as follows: No driver shall enter or cross a highway or a sidewalk from a private road or driveway or a lane or alley unless the driver yields the right- of-way to pedestrians and vehicles approaching from the sidewalk or highway. [ 22 ] By failing to adequately ensure that it was safe to proceed and by entering the street before it was safe to do so, the Plaintiff’s actions were negligent and the cause of the accident. [ 23 ] Therefore, the Plaintiff has failed to prove her case and her claim is dismissed.

Dated the 26 th day of July, 2011, at Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan. _______________________________________________ M.T. Gordon, J