## Facts

- Robert L. Taylor drove a partially loaded milk tank truck while delivering milk under a written “carrier’s contract” with a cooperative marketing association (“Co-op”).
- The contract used independent-contractor language and required Taylor to pay operating expenses and carry his own liability insurance.
- Despite that language, the contract and course of dealing required Taylor to buy his truck from the Co-op, assigned his delivery route, restricted him from hauling for competitors, and allowed the Co-op to terminate the relationship on short notice.
- Casper B. Meirose drove an automobile northbound and agreed to give his neighbor, George B. Sandrock, a ride into town; Sandrock rode in the passenger seat.
- On August 2, 1963, at an uncontrolled rural intersection in Cedar County, Nebraska, Taylor’s westbound truck and Meirose’s northbound car collided approximately near the center of the intersection.
- Visibility was limited by a cornfield and tall weeds near the intersection; the day was clear and the roadway was dry.
- Sandrock was killed. Delores Sandrock, as administratrix of his estate, sued Taylor, the Co-op, and Meirose for negligence causing wrongful death.
- A jury returned a verdict of $46,712 against all three defendants. All defendants appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to submit Taylor’s negligence to the jury, including whether he forfeited any directional right-of-way at the uncontrolled intersection by traveling at an unlawful speed or otherwise failing to use due care.
2. Whether the trial court properly admitted lay testimony estimating Taylor’s speed when observed shortly before the collision, even though the observation point was some distance from the intersection.
3. Whether Taylor was, as a matter of law, an independent contractor of the Co-op, or whether the Co-op’s retained control allowed the jury to find a master–servant relationship and impose respondeat superior liability.
4. Whether Meirose could be held liable to Sandrock (a passenger in Meirose’s car) under Nebraska’s guest-passenger rules, and whether Meirose’s negligence could be imputed to Sandrock to defeat or reduce recovery against Taylor and the Co-op.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the judgment against Taylor, holding that the evidence permitted the jury to find negligent speed, lookout, and control under the obstructed conditions, and to find that any directional right-of-way was forfeited if Taylor traveled at an unlawful speed.
- The court held that admitting the speed-estimate testimony was within the trial court’s discretion because the observation was close enough in time and distance to support a reasonable inference about speed at the intersection.
- The court affirmed the judgment against the Co-op, concluding that the independent-contractor label in the contract did not control and that the Co-op’s retained control created a jury question on whether Taylor acted as the Co-op’s servant.
- The court reversed the judgment against Meirose, concluding the record did not support liability to Sandrock under the applicable passenger/host-driver standard, and it rejected Taylor’s attempt to impute Meirose’s negligence to Sandrock.

## Legal Principles

- At an uncontrolled intersection, directional right-of-way is not absolute; under Nebraska law, a driver traveling at an unlawful speed forfeits any right-of-way that might otherwise apply.
- Whether a driver exercised reasonable care in speed, lookout, and control at a visibility-obstructed intersection is generally for the jury when supported by evidence.
- Evidence of a vehicle’s speed shortly before a collision may be admitted in the trial court’s discretion when the timing and distance allow a reasonable inference that the speed remained substantially the same at the point of impact.
- A passenger generally is not charged with the driver’s negligence absent a relationship (such as a joint enterprise) giving the passenger an equal right to control the vehicle’s operation.
- For respondeat superior, the key inquiry is the principal’s right to control the details of the work; disclaimers and expense/insurance provisions are not conclusive where route assignment, exclusivity, required equipment arrangements, and termination rights show retained control.
- Under Nebraska’s guest-passenger framework, a host driver is not liable to a guest passenger on a showing of ordinary negligence alone; the heightened standard must be met to sustain a judgment against the host driver.

## Conclusion

The Nebraska Supreme Court left in place the jury’s verdict against Taylor and the Co-op because the evidence supported findings that Taylor drove unsafely for an obstructed, uncontrolled intersection and that the Co-op retained enough control over Taylor’s milk-hauling work to support vicarious liability, but the court refused to charge Sandrock with Meirose’s negligence and reversed the judgment against Meirose under the governing passenger/host-driver standard.


Sandrock v. Taylor, 174 N.W.2d 186 (1970)