Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Lackner
| Decision Date | 20 December 1917 |
| Docket Number | 2302. |
| Citation | 246 F. 931 |
| Parties | PENNSYLVANIA R. CO. v. LACKNER. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit |
John S Applegate & Son, of Red Bank, N.J., for plaintiff in error.
McDermott & Enright, of Jersey City, N.J. (James D. Carpenter, Jr., of Jersey City, N.J., of counsel), for defendant in error.
Before BUFFINGTON, McPHERSON, and WOOLLEY, Circuit Judges.
The plaintiff is the widow and administratrix of John Lackner who was killed by one of defendant's trains at Matawan N.J., about 5 o'clock in the morning of September 7 1915.
The train, which was composed of an engine and five empty coaches, was not on the regular schedule, and was running south from New York at 25 or 30 miles an hour. The point where Lackner was struck is directly opposite the station about 200 feet south of Main street crossing. The station building is west of the south-bound track, and between the building and the westerly rail is an open space of at least 30 feet, used for all purposes by arriving and departing trains. Upon this space, bundles of newspapers were thrown from the early train that brought them from New York, and the dealers to whom the papers were directed were accustomed to go upon the ground and pick out their own bundles. This custom had been continued for several years, was well known to the railroads using the station, and was permitted without objection. On September 7 David Solomon, a news-dealer in a town a few miles away, went to Matawan to get his papers, and took Lackner with him to help. When they reached the station, the train that brought the newspapers (a train of the Central Railroad of New Jersey) had gone, and a number of bundles were lying upon the space referred to within a short distance of the south-bound track. No regular train was due to arrive on this track for nearly an hour, and Solomon and Lackner proceeded to inspect the bundles, in order to select what was theirs. While thus engaged, the unscheduled train in question came along and struck them both, injuring Solomon and killing Lackner. The New York & Long Branch Railroad Company, which owns the tracks, stations, and other parts of the roadbed, operates no trains of its own, but allows the Pennsylvania Railroad and the Central Railroad of New Jersey to use the property and to operate their trains thereon under an agreement that does not expire until 1987. The verdict has determined that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tompkins v. Erie R. Co.
...193 F. 603 (C.C.A.2); Erie R. Co. v. Burke, 214 F. 247 (C.C.A.2); Robbins v. Pennsylvania Co., 245 F. 435, 441 (C.C.A.6); Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Lackner, 246 F. 931 (C. C.A.3); American Law Institute, Torts, § 334. It is likewise generally recognized law that a jury may find that negligence......
-
McGinty v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
...likely to cause him injury. Middleton v. P. Sanford Ross, Inc., 213 F. 6, 129 C. C. A. 622 (C. C. A. 5); Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. Lackner, 246 F. 931, 159 C. C. A. 203 (C. C. A. 3); Hodges v. Erie Railroad Co., 257 F. 494, 168 C. C. A. 498 (C. C. A. 6); Waldron v. Director General, 266 ......
-
Demetro v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
...tracks might be expected, and such care was not required under the facts here. Tedesco v. Reading Co., supra; cf. Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. Lackner, 246 F. 931 (3 Cir.1917). Plaintiff admits that he has no proof of negligence other than that contained in the deposition of defendant Grazi......