Baltimore & O.R. Co. v. Owings
| Decision Date | 23 June 1886 |
| Citation | 5 A. 329,65 Md. 502 |
| Parties | BALTIMORE & O. R. CO. v. OWINGS AND WIFE. |
| Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Appeal from circuit court, Baltimore county.
Joint action by husband and wife to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the latter in being run down by defendant's cars at a highway crossing. Verdict and judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals.
John K. Cowen, W. Irvine Cross, and John I Yellott, for appellant. Wm. P. Maulsby, Thos. A. Murray, and R. R Boarman, for appellees.
Mrs. Owings was struck by a train of cars belonging to the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, and was seriously injured. This action was brought by her husband and herself against the railroad company for the recovery of damages. The points decided by the court below involved principally the inquiries whether the injuries were caused by the negligence of the agents and servants of the railroad company, and whether there was contributory negligence on the part of Mrs. Owings. The accident occurred near a station on defendant's railroad, named Watersville. The injured person, having occasion to visit a store kept at the station, was returning on her way to her own home. The station was on the north side of the track, and her house is on the south side, at a distance of about a quarter of a mile. A public road crosses the railroad track about 140 feet west of the station, and a path for travelers on foot crosses the railroad track between the station and the public road, at a distance, east of the public road, variously stated by the witnesses to be from 30 to 48 feet.
According to the testimony of Mrs. Owings, when she left the station on her return homewards, a long train of burden cars was passing on the north track, and going west. She walked along by the side of the track westwardly, towards the path mentioned, until she reached a point about six feet east of it, and there she stopped, and waited until the train of cars passed her about the length of two cars, and after it had passed she looked, as well as she could, up said tracks westwardly, and listened to see and hear whether any train was coming down the tracks from the west. She heard no whistle or blast from an engine, and heard no noise of any coming train, and she then started and reached the pathway for foot travelers, and walked on it to the north track of the railroad. She stopped on the north track, and looked up the south track, and listened to see and hear whether any engine or train of cars was approaching from a westward direction. She could not see anything, or hear any noise of an approaching train. She stopped, looked, and listened long enough to see and hear the noise of any approaching train, and saw and heard none, and believed that the tracks were clear, and that she could cross the tracks safely. When she was looking westwardly, while crossing the north track, she could see but a short distance because of a curve in the railroad track westward of her. She then stepped off the north track towards the south track, and just as she put her foot on the north rail of the south track, as she supposes, she was struck by the engine of a train coming from the west, and was very severely injured. The engine came on her so suddenly that she did not see or hear it until it struck her. The west-bound train was a long burden train, and made a great deal of noise. When she stepped on the south track, she had her head turned west, up the road, and was looking. Other testimony in the cause described the curve in the road. There is a high bluff on the east side of the public road, and north side of the railroad, where they intersect each other, and the railroad tracks curve around this hill to the north. Several of the witnesses testified that the railroad crossing at the county road was very dangerous. One of the witnesses testified that he had been an agent of the railroad company at this station for eight years, and that he had spoken to different officers of the railroad company about the dangerous character of the crossing; mentioning persons whom he described as the supervisor, the general superintendent, and the chief engineer. It was also in evidence that Watersville was a place of considerable resort by people coming from the north and south of the railroad, and that the country around Watersville was tolerably thickly settled. Other witnesses besides Mrs. Owings testified that they did not hear any whistle from the train which did the injury. They were not, however, in a situation to require them to pay attention to it. There was evidence that the bluff above mentioned obstructed the sound, as well as the view, of a train approaching from the west.
There was testimony, on the part of the defendant, to show that the engineer of the train in question blew a long blast from the whistle of his engine when 1,500 feet west of the Watersville crossing. He himself testifies that he did not take any precaution to avoid running over any one at the crossing except blowing the whistle; and that if persons were about crossing the track there, and did not hear the whistle, he could not help running over them; that the maximum speed at which our trains, as he expresses it, were allowed to run, was 18 miles an hour, meaning probably freight trains; and that he was going at about that rate when at the crossing. There was evidence that west of a point designated as No. 1 there was a descending grade of about 85 feet to a mile; and that from No. 1 to a point below Watersville station, the grade continues, but is less. No. 1 is stated to be west of the whistle-post, and this is stated to be 1,500 feet west of the public crossing.
The evidence offered at the trial is set out in the record at much length, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial