Conway v. O'Brien

Background

A woman from New Hampshire was hurt while riding as a passenger in a car driven by a Vermont driver when that car collided with another vehicle on a country road near a covered bridge in Vermont. The passenger won a jury verdict in federal trial court under Vermont’s law that allows a passenger to recover only if the driver was grossly negligent. The federal appeals court later threw out the case, saying the evidence of gross negligence was too weak, and the Supreme Court agreed to review the result.

Reasoning

The key question was whether the evidence was enough for a jury to decide gross negligence. Accepting the passenger’s version, the driver approached a blind, sharp sixty-degree curve and a narrow bridge at about fifteen miles per hour, cut left without slowing or sounding a horn, and met a larger car emerging from the bridge. Vermont rules say drivers should stay as far right as practicable on curves and signal with a horn. The Court relied on Vermont’s definition of gross negligence — a failure to exercise even a slight degree of care — and concluded a jury could reasonably find the driver’s conduct met that standard. The Court therefore reversed the appeals court and affirmed the trial court’s judgment sending the question to the jury.

Real world impact

The decision lets this passenger’s claim stand and signals that, under Vermont law, familiar drivers who fail to signal, take a blind corner on the wrong side, and cause a crash may face a jury determination of gross negligence. It restores the trial result rather than ending the case on appeal.