Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 16109.
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
| Writing for the Court | BORAH, TUTTLE and CAMERON, Circuit |
| Citation | 241 F.2d 494 |
| Parties | Sam E. BRINSON, and Sam E. Brinson and Maudie M. Brinson, Appellants, v. ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 16109.,16109. |
| Decision Date | 01 March 1957 |
241 F.2d 494 (1957)
Sam E. BRINSON, and Sam E. Brinson and Maudie M. Brinson, Appellants,
v.
ILLINOIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellee.
No. 16109.
United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.
March 1, 1957.
E. K. Theus, Monroe, La., J. D. DeBlieux, E. Drew McKinnis, Baton Rouge, La., for appellants.
Selim B. Lemle, New Orleans, La., M. C. Thompson, Monroe, La., Joseph H. Wright, John W. Freels, Chicago, Ill., Thompson, Thompson & Sparks, Monroe, La., Lemle & Kelleher, New Orleans, La., of counsel, for appellee.
Before BORAH, TUTTLE and CAMERON, Circuit Judges.
BORAH, Circuit Judge.
These appeals in two railroad grade crossing cases come to us on one consolidated
The accident which gave rise to this litigation occurred at defendant's mainline crossing on Chicago Street in Delhi, Louisiana, when a passenger train collided with an automobile driven by the minor Billy Lorraine Brinson, and in which Maxine Brinson, the owner, was a passenger. Following this occurrence Sam Brinson, individually and as administrator of the estate of his minor son, brought suit to recover damages for the personal injuries sustained by his son. And Sam Brinson, together with his wife, brought a separate suit to recover damages for the alleged wrongful death of their daughter, Maxine.
In each of the complaints it was alleged that the defendant was guilty of negligence in the following particulars: in operating its train at an excessive rate of speed; in causing or permitting its right of way to be obstructed by buildings, railroad cars and certain heavy farm machinery; and in failing to give the required statutory warnings, or adequate or reasonable warnings of the crossing and of the approach of the train to the crossing. The defendant denied negligence on its part, and, in the alternative alleged that both the driver and owner of the automobile were guilty of contributory negligence which barred the recovery of any and all damages sought by the plaintiffs.
The two actions were consolidated by the court below and a trial by jury was had. During its progress and at the close of all of the evidence, defendant moved for a directed verdict in each case, but the court, under Rule 50(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U. S.C.A., reserved its ruling on the motions and submitted the actions...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rutherford v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 17865.
...follow that the caboose was preceding the engine when it was backing. 6 Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., 5 Cir., 1957, 241 F.2d 494, 7 White v. Illinois Central R. Co., 1905, 114 La. 825, 38 So. 574. 8 "Even, then, though a pedestrian may, without being a trespasser, choose the tra......
-
Renz v. Texas & P. Ry. Co., 443
...Insurance Company v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App.1951, 55 So.2d 693; Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494. While it is true that if the right of way is obstructed the driver of the vehicle must exercise a higher degree of caution, the Courts have po......
-
Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Laborde, 17174.
...court or of fact for the jury. Appellees concede, as they must, that, as decided by this court in Brinson v. Illinois C. Ry. Co., 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494, while negligence and contributory negligence are ordinarily issues for the jury, where there is no substantial conflict in the evidence and......
-
Simon v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., 92
...Insurance Company v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App.1951, 55 So.2d 693; Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494. While it is true that if the right of way is obstructed the driver of the vehicle must exercise a higher degree of caution, the Courts have po......
-
Rutherford v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 17865.
...follow that the caboose was preceding the engine when it was backing. 6 Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Co., 5 Cir., 1957, 241 F.2d 494, 7 White v. Illinois Central R. Co., 1905, 114 La. 825, 38 So. 574. 8 "Even, then, though a pedestrian may, without being a trespasser, choose the tra......
-
Renz v. Texas & P. Ry. Co., 443
...Insurance Company v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App.1951, 55 So.2d 693; Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494. While it is true that if the right of way is obstructed the driver of the vehicle must exercise a higher degree of caution, the Courts have po......
-
Texas & Pacific Railway Company v. Laborde, 17174.
...court or of fact for the jury. Appellees concede, as they must, that, as decided by this court in Brinson v. Illinois C. Ry. Co., 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494, while negligence and contributory negligence are ordinarily issues for the jury, where there is no substantial conflict in the evidence and......
-
Simon v. Texas & N. O. R. Co., 92
...Insurance Company v. Texas & Pacific Railway Company, La.App.1951, 55 So.2d 693; Brinson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 5 Cir., 241 F.2d 494. While it is true that if the right of way is obstructed the driver of the vehicle must exercise a higher degree of caution, the Courts have po......