Crawford v. St. Louis & S. F. R. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 08 July 1912
• Docket Number: 15,299
• Citation: 59 So. 86,102 Miss. 269
• Parties: E. J. CRAWFORD v. ST. LOUIS & SAN FRANCISCO R. R. CO
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

59 So. 86

102 Miss. 269

E. J. CRAWFORD v. ST. LOUIS & SAN FRANCISCO R. R. CO

No. 15,299

Supreme Court of Mississippi

July 8, 1912

APPEAL from the circuit court of Union county, HON.W. A. ROANE Judge.

Suit by E. J. Crawford against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals.

This suit is brought by the appellant, for the death of his son who was killed by a freight train of the appellee about nine o'clock at night, within the corporate limits of the town of Hickory Flat, between two public road crossings which are about one hundred yards apart. Deceased was killed about halfway between these two crossings, and about one hundred and fifty yards from the depot. At the point where he was struck, there was nothing to obstruct the view. There were no witnesses to the killing. According to the testimony here, he was seen a short time before the killing, leaving the depot at Hickory Flat, and witnesses say he seemed to be intoxicated. He walked up the track, and was not seen again until his dead body was found next morning by the side of the railroad, with evidences of having been struck by a passing train. When found, he had a broken whisky bottle in his pocket. The fireman and engineer both testified that they did not see him, but that they whistled for the crossings and for the station. Certain of plaintiff's witnesses testified that they heard the train whistle, and it sounded like an alarm. The train was going at a rate of speed estimated between twenty-five and forty miles an hour, and was within the corporate limits of the town of Hickory Flat when the accident occurred. After the testimony for both sides was in the court gave a peremptory instruction to find for the defendant, on the theory that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence; and from a judgment in accordance with this instruction this appeal was taken.

Reversed and remanded.

Stephens & Kenneday, for appellant.

The defendant company didn't know about the killing, had no information on the subject, until some days afterwards; the thing of violating the laws of the land was so commonplace with the employees that they didn't even think it possible that injury would result to human life, or property although, running through an incorporated town in violation of law, although running over two public crossings at an unlawful rate of speed within the incorporated limits of said town; although and not withstanding this was an extra train running at an early hour in the night, and on no regular schedule and although this most unfortunate occurrence took place according to the proof, right in the very heart of the town and in front of the hotel, the employees having control of the train did not seem to have the slightest misgiving as to the probable outcome of such wanton, wilful and reckless disregard of human life and property as was involved in the unlawful running of said train in and through said town on that fatal night in March; but counsel for appellee were careful to develop the fact that the first fifteen feet immediately in front of a moving engine got no benefit from the headlight of that engine, but that darkness prevailed and covered that fifteen feet of space throughout the night and...