Britton v. Northern Pacific R. Co.

• Decision Date: 13 November 1891
• Citation: 47 Minn. 340
• Parties: DAVID BRITTON <I>vs.</I> NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

47 Minn. 340

DAVID BRITTONvs.

NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

November 13, 1891.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the district court for St. Louis county, where the action was tried before Stearns, J., a verdict of $750 rendered for plaintiff, and a motion for a new trial denied.

John C. Bullitt, Jr., Tilden R. Selmes, and Hollemback & Wood, for appellant.

Edson & Hanks, for respondent.

COLLINS, J.

The plaintiff was at work as a section hand upon defendant's line of railway in the state of Wisconsin, with three other men, one being the foreman. On the morning in question these men were at work on the east end of their section, and were directed to go westerly with a hand-car to a station called "Walbridge." The road-master accompanied them, but before reaching their destination they came upon a locomotive standing upon the track. In front of it was a flat-car loaded with sand, which was then being thrown off for use at a culvert. The locomotive had backed down from Walbridge, thus bringing the tender towards the hand-car. The latter was stopped about 300 feet distant. The section hands were instructed by the road-master, who went forward to the locomotive, to remain there until it returned to Walbridge, and then to follow with the hand-car. The men commenced work along the road-bed, and soon after, while so employed, discovered the locomotive backing down upon them, and upon the car which had been allowed to remain upon the track. No signal whatever had been given by the engineer, either of warning or the customary one for clearing the track of obstructions, and the locomotive was less than 200 feet away when seen. The foreman immediately ordered the men to remove the hand-car; the plaintiff, with others, sprang forward to obey; and, while engaged in an effort to push it down an embankment at that point, (plaintiff having hold of the car-handle,) it was struck by the moving locomotive, knocked several feet, and, striking plaintiff on his body, is said to have produced the injuries complained of.

The first inquiry is as to the negligence of the engineer in charge of the locomotive, and upon this there was testimony enough to warrant the jury in finding that he was negligent when backing down upon the men and car. Under the statutes of the state in which the accident occurred, (Annotated St. Wis. 1889, § 1816a,) put in evidence by plaintiff, defendant corporation was liable for the negligence of its engineer, plaintiff himself being free from negligence which contributed to the result. The only testimony placed before the jury was that of the plaintiff and his witnesses, so that the circumstances, as related by them, stood uncontradicted. The view from the engineer's cab along the track to the point where the men were at work and the hand-car stood was unobstructed,...