Killen v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
Decision Date | 27 October 1948 |
Citation | 376 Pa. 320,102 A.2d 140 |
Parties | KILLEN v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO. et al. MILLER v. PENNSYLVANIA R. CO. et al. . Bruce R. Martin, Dalzell, Pringle, Bredin & Martin, Pittsburgh, for appellants. Jos. F. Weis, Joseph F. Weis, Jr., Sherriff, Lindsay, Weis & McGinnis, E. V. Buckley, Mercer & Buckley, Pittsburgh, for appellee. Before STERN, C. J., and STEARNE, JONES, BELL, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO and ARNOLD, JJ. BELL, Justice. Each of the judgments is affirmed on the following opinion of Judge O'Brien, speaking for the Court en banc. 'Lloyd K. Killen and Mack E. Miller, while in the course of their employment as employees of the United States Postal Service, were riding in a postal mail car on defendant's train in the vicinity of Uhrichsville, Ohio, on the morning of |
Court | Pennsylvania Supreme Court |
Bruce R. Martin, Dalzell, Pringle, Bredin & Martin, Pittsburgh, for appellants.
Jos. F. Weis, Joseph F. Weis, Jr., Sherriff, Lindsay, Weis & McGinnis, E. V. Buckley, Mercer & Buckley, Pittsburgh, for appellee.
Before STERN, C. J., and STEARNE, JONES, BELL, CHIDSEY, MUSMANNO and ARNOLD, JJ.
Each of the judgments is affirmed on the following opinion of Judge O'Brien, speaking for the Court en banc.
'Lloyd K. Killen and Mack E. Miller, while in the course of their employment as employees of the United States Postal Service, were riding in a postal mail car on defendant's train in the vicinity of Uhrichsville, Ohio, on the morning of October 27, 1948. The plaintiffs were paying passengers of the defendant railroad company. The plaintiffs sued the Pennsylvania Railroad Company for injuries sustained when the train collided with a truck, heavily laden with steel at Wolf's Crossing. The Railroad Company brought in the additional defendants.
'The case of Mack E. Miller against the Railroad Company and the additional defendants was tried previously, resulting in a verdict against the Railroad Company alone. In that action the Railroad Company moved for judgment n.o.v. and for a new trial. When both motions were refused by the court below, the Railroad Company took an appeal to the Supreme Court (Miller v. Pennsylvania Railroad Company, 368 Pa. 507 ) where judgment n.o.v. was refused but a new trial was granted to all the parties. In refusing judgment n.o.v. the Supreme Court said [368 Pa.] at pages 512, 513 : '* * * But the question still remains--considering the fog and the position of the truck when the flasher lights went on, was the defendant's warning timely and sufficient?
'The jury could have found, considering the testimony in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, the following facts: Shortly before the accident a bus traveling on U. S. Highway Route 36 in the westerly outskirts in the town of Uhrichsville, Ohio, came up behind a truck of the defendants' in a thick [very dense] fog and followed it for a distance of two to three miles at a speed of ten to twenty miles an hour until it approached Wolf's Crossing. The highway at this point runs north and south and the railroad east and west. The highway and the railroad meet at an angle of 24 degrees 30 minutes. There are two railroad tracks and the eastbound train was on the second or southerly track. The truck flashed the rear marker lights signaling stop and did stop at a point before entering the tracks beyond the point of the flasher lights, at which time the flasher lights began to operate. The driver of the truck looked both ways and started the truck proceeding in creeper gear. The train was being operated at a speed of 70 to 75 miles an hour and activated the flasher lights at a distance 3510 feet from the crossing. The truck proceeded over the crossing and when at a point on the east-bound southern track was struck by the train causing a blinding flash. No bell or whistle or any warning device was given by the train prior to the collision. The area was blanketed by a thick fog. The distance from the flasher signal on the north side of the crossing to the east bound track is a distance of 71 feet. The usual speed of the train at this point was 60 miles an hour. The red flasher lights were 21 candle power and the headlight of the locomotive was 550,000 candle power. The locomotive headlight could be seen when it was a distance of about 75 feet from the crossing. The jury could have found from all the evidence that the driver of the truck had passed the first flashing signal before it commenced to flash. There was no evidence why the truck driver could not see the flashing signal on the other side of the tracks. There is no question of contributory negligence involved in these cases.
'Mr. Weis, on cross-examination, asked:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Izzi v. Philadelphia Transp. Co.
... ... Neil Douthart ... Neil DOUTHART ... PHILADELPHIA TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, Appellant ... Supreme Court of Pennsylvania ... Nov. 12, 1963 ... Rehearing Denied Dec. 16, 1963 ... [412 Pa. 560] ... Harry A. Takiff, Philadelphia, for appellant ... Luzerne & Carbon Co. M. T. Co., 394 Pa. 577, 580, 148 A.2d 534; Nebel v. Burrelli, 352 Pa. 70, 74-75, 41 A.2d 873; Killen v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 376 Pa. 320, 328, 102 A.2d 140; Miller v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 368 Pa. 507, 511, 84 A.2d 200; Schickel v. Yellow Cab ... ...
-
Ferruzza v. City of Pittsburgh
...for a sound or warning. Williams v. City of Pittsburgh, 349 Pa. 430, 37 A.2d 540. Cf. [394 Pa. 78] Killen v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 376 Pa. 320, 329, 102 A.2d 140. The question was reviewed at great length and the rule was extended in two recent cases: Costack v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 376 Pa. ......
-
Shaw v. Irvin
...Carbon Co. M. T. Co., 394 Pa. 577, 580, 148 A.2d 534; Nebel v. Burrelli, 352 Pa. 70, 74-75, 41 A.2d 873; Killen v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 376 Pa. 320, 328, 102 A.2d 140; Miller v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 368 Pa. 507, 511, 84 A.2d 200; Schickel v. Yellow Cab Company, 369 Pa. 356, 85 A.2d 13......
-
Conrad v. BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY
... ... The BALTIMORE & OHIO RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant ... Civ. A. 11022 ... United States District Court W. D. Pennsylvania ... May 3, 1956.146 F. Supp. 152 Murrin & Murrin, Butler, Pa., for plaintiffs ... Vincent M. Casey, Margiotti & ... Such a proposition is not the law, however. See Miller v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 368 Pa. 507, 84 A.2d 200; Killen v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 376 Pa. 320, 102 A.2d 140; Bickel v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 217 Pa. 456, 66 A. 756; and Ealy v. New York Central R. Co., 333 ... ...