Gutierrez v. Union Pacific Railroad Company
| Decision Date | 05 December 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 8537.,8537. |
| Citation | 372 F.2d 121 |
| Parties | John GUTIERREZ and Beatrice Gutierrez, Appellants, v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Appellee. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Tenth Circuit |
Donald L. Dill, Denver, Colo. (John S. Carroll, Denver, Colo., was with him on the brief), for appellants.
Edward G. Knowles, Denver, Colo. (Clayton D. Knowles, Denver, Colo., was with him on the brief), for appellee.
Before PHILLIPS and HICKEY, Circuit Judges, and BRATTON, District Judge.
This is a diversity action brought by the appellants, John Gutierrez and Beatrice Gutierrez, against the Union Pacific Railroad Company, seeking damages for the wrongful death of their minor son, William Michael Gutierrez, as a result of a collision between the pickup truck he was driving and the train of the Union Pacific Railroad Company.
The collision occurred at an intersection of a paved county road and the railroad tracks at about 9:45 A. M. on March 5, 1964, approximately one quarter mile south of Fort Lupton, Colorado.
The appellee's train was going south at a speed of between 75 and 80 miles per hour. The pickup truck being driven by the appellants' decedent approached from the east at a speed of approximately 35 miles per hour. Skid marks of about 37 feet in length were left by the pickup truck extending to the point of impact.
The testimony and photographic exhibits show that in approaching the railroad tracks from the east for a distance of several hundred yards there is a clear and unobstructed view of the railroad tracks across an open field. This field lies north of the road and east of the railroad, and is about one-half mile in length from north to south. At the time of the accident the weather was clear. The decedent lived in the vicinity, was familiar with the crossing and had traversed it numerous times, in both directions.
The pickup truck being driven by the decedent was owned by his mother, the appellant Beatrice Gutierrez, and was used as a family purpose vehicle.
At the close of all the evidence the trial court granted appellee's motion for a directed verdict, finding contributory negligence as a matter of law on the part of William Michael Gutierrez, and that this contributory negligence was imputed to the appellants under the family purpose doctrine.
While other points are raised, the principal issue for consideration is the finding of contributory negligence as a matter of law. Appellants contend that the court's action in directing a verdict deprived them of a jury trial.
The right to a jury trial in federal court is a matter of federal law in a diversity action and this principle...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railway Co. v. Howell
...the jury is controlled by federal common law. See Simler v. Conner, 372 U.S. 221, 83 S.Ct. 609, 9 L.Ed.2d 691; Gutierrez v. Union Pac. Railroad Co., 372 F.2d 121 (10th Cir. 1966); Christopherson v. Humphrey, 366 F.2d 323 (10th Cir. 1966); Basham v. City Bus Co., 219 F.2d 547, 52 A.L.R.2d 58......
-
Gilpin v. Langan
...position so long as 'there are no controverted issues of fact upon which reasonable minds could differ' "); Gutierrez v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 372 F.2d 121, 122 (10th Cir.1966) ("the court should direct a verdict where the evidence is without dispute, or is conflicting but of such con......
-
Sumaza v. Cooperative Association
...place of arbitration was fixed as Esbjerg, Denmark. Arbitration in foreign places has been repeatedly upheld, Gutiérrez v. Union Pacific Railroad (10th Cir., 1966) 372 F.2d 121; Amtorg Trading Corp. v. Camden Fibre Mills, 304 N.Y. 519, 521, 109 N.E.2d 606, 607 (1952); International Refugee ......
-
Weeks v. Latter-Day Saints Hospital
...a verdict in this case is tested by federal law. Christopherson v. Humphrey, 366 F.2d 323 (10th Cir. 1966); Gutierrez v. Union Pacific R. R. Co., 372 F.2d 121 (10th Cir. 1966).1 In considering a motion to direct a verdict the trial court should view the evidence in the light most favorable ......