Burge v. Wabash R. Co.
Decision Date | 10 June 1912 |
Citation | 148 S.W. 925 |
Parties | BURGE v. WABASH R. CO. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
A passenger train ran 60 miles an hour when approaching a crossing. A traveler could not be seen owing to a curve in the track until the train was within 900 or 1,000 feet of him while he was approaching the crossing. The engineer testified that he did all he could to stop the train to prevent a collision with the traveler but without success, and he was corroborated. Held, that there could be no recovery under the humanitarian doctrine because of want of ability of the engineer to stop the train by the exercise of proper care.
7. RAILROADS (§ 316)—OPERATION OF TRAINS—CROSSINGS IN COUNTRY—NEGLIGENCE.
Where there was no increased use of a railroad crossing occasioned by the presence of a number of houses in the neighborhood of the crossing, and the travel from a coal mine on the side of the track was not over the crossing, the crossing was an ordinary and usual country crossing, and the operation of a train over it at a high speed was not actionable negligence.
8. RAILROADS (§ 335)—CROSSINGS—OBLIGATION OF TRAVELER.
A traveler approaching a railroad crossing must look and listen before entering on the crossing, and his failure to do so is not excused by the fact that the train was run in excess of the speed fixed by an ordinance.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Randolph County; A. P. Terrill, Judge.
Action by Mary C. Burge against the Wabash Railroad Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.
J. L. Minnis and Robertson & Robertson, for appellant. E. J. Howard, for respondent.
This cause has a checkered career. Going to the Kansas City Court of Appeals from the trial court, it came here upon a constitutional question. Assigned to Division 1 of this court, and there written by one of our learned Commissioners, the judges of that division failed to agree upon an opinion and thus a transfer to this court. The case made runs along these lines: Plaintiff is the widow of T. H. B. Burge, an aged gentleman, who was struck and killed by one of defendant's passenger trains at a public crossing near Huntsville in Randolph county. The negligence charged in the petition is:
Answer was (1) a general denial, and (2) some three separate statements of the plea of contributory negligence. Reply general denial. Verdict and judgment for plaintiff in the sum of $2,000, from which defendant appealed as aforesaid. In division we were all of opinion that there was reversible error in the case in the instructions given, but diversity of opinion arose on the question of liability or no liability. We shall discuss but two questions, i. e., the constitutional question, which gives us jurisdiction, and the question of defendant's liability under the admitted facts.
1. Bond, Commissioner, in the divisional opinion, has thoroughly and satisfactorily discussed the constitutional question involved, and we adopt his views. He said:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Edwards v. Business Men's Assurance Co., 38104.
......(2d) 40; Berne v. Prudential Ins. Co., 235 Mo. App. 178, 129 S.W. (2d) 92; Mayhew v. Travelers Protective Assn. of Am., 52 S.W. (2d) 29; Burge v. Wabash Railroad Co., 244 Mo. 76, 148 S.W. 925; Laessig v. Travelers Protective Assn., 169 Mo. 272; Brunswick v. Standard Accident Ins. Co., 278 ......
-
Dobson v. St. L.-S.F. Ry. Co.
...care for his own safety. Pedigo v. Railway, 272 S.W. 1029, 1030; Payne v. Railway, 136 Mo. 562; Mockowik v. Railway, 196 Mo. 550; Burge v. Railway, 244 Mo. 76, l.c. 94; Tetwiler v. Railway, 242 Mo. 178. Where an opportunity is afforded by looking to see the approaching train in time to stop......
-
Pentecost v. Terminal Railroad Co., 31541.
......v. ST. LOUIS MERCHANTS BRIDGE TERMINAL RAILROAD COMPANY, a Corporation, ST. LOUIS TERMINAL RAILWAY COMPANY, a Corporation, and WABASH RAILROAD COMPANY, a Corporation, Appellants. No. 31541. No. 31542. Supreme Court of Missouri. Division One, December 22, 1933. [66 S.W.2d 534]. ...Met. St. Ry. Co., 186 Mo. 350, 85 S.W. 351; Degonia v. Ry. Co., 224 Mo. 564, 123 S.W. 807; McGee v. Railroad Co., 214 Mo. 530, 114 S.W. 33; Burge v. Railroad Co., 244 Mo. 76, 148 S.W. 925; Rollison v. Railroad Co., 252 Mo. 525, 160 S.W. 994; Sullivan v. Railroad Co., 308 Mo. 48, 271 S.W. 983; ......
-
Jackson v. Southwest Missouri R. Co.
...216 Mo. 563, 116 S. W. 553; McCreery v. Railways Co., 221 Mo. 18, 120 S. W. 24; Farris v. Railroad, 151 S. W. 979; Burge v. Railroad, 244 Mo. 76, 148 S. W. 925; Green v. Railroad, 192 Mo. 139, 90 S. W. 805; Stotler v. Railroad, 204 Mo. 619, 103 S. W. 1. It is said in Porter v. Railroad, 199......