International & G. N. R. Co. v. Knight
| Decision Date | 12 May 1899 |
| Citation | 52 S.W. 640 |
| Parties | INTERNATIONAL & G. N. R. CO. v. KNIGHT.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Walker county; J. M. Smither, Judge.
Action by W. C. Knight against the International & Great Northern Railroad Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.
G. H. Gould, for appellant. Williams & Smither and Powell, Ball & Randolph, for appellee.
This is the second appeal in this case to this court. The decision on the former appeal is reported in 45 S. W. 167. The appellee instituted suit against the appellant for damages resulting to him from the death of his son, Clark Knight, who was run upon and killed by one of appellant's freight trains while he was attempting to cross its track at a public crossing in the town of Riverside, Walker county. The petition charged that the death was caused by the negligence of the defendant in having, along and near to the track on which the train was moving which ran upon and killed the deceased, box cars, a wharf, seed houses, cattle pens, shutes, and cross-ties and logs, whereby the view of said track was obstructed at said crossing; and in permitting a freight train to occupy said crossing, and to detain and prevent the deceased for 20 or 30 minutes from passing over said track at said crossing; and in failing to ring the bell and blow the whistle of the train which struck the deceased, while the same was approaching the crossing. The defendant answered by general denial and charge of contributory negligence on part of the deceased. On trial of the cause on October 10, 1898, verdict and judgment were rendered for the plaintiff for $1,500, and, a new trial being denied defendant, it appealed to this court. There were, as charged in the petition, a box car standing on a side track, just four or five feet south of the crossing, on the east side of the track; and there were also on that side, and near to the crossing, a cotton wharf, cotton-seed house, and piles of ties, and a cattle shute and cattle pen. The town of Riverside is on the west side of the track. The deceased delivered a load of cotton, which he hauled from the country on the wharf, and drove towards the crossing, with the intention of passing over the track and going into the town; but, finding the crossing blocked by a train of cars which headed south, he halted his team at the north end of the wharf, and within a few feet of the box car, and there engaged in conversation with a neighbor, one Hale, who was on horseback, and destined also for the town across the track. The two were kept waiting for 20 to 30 minutes, at the expiration of which time the train occupying the crossing backed north, and opened the way to town, when Hale rode over the track, and the deceased, in attempting to follow him, was run over by a train which had approached from the south while the two were waiting the departure of the train upon the crossing, unobserved by them, by reason of the box car and other mentioned obstructions just south of them, and near to the track. The side track on which the box car...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kettlehake v. American Car & Foundry Co.
...N.Y.S. 223, 41 A.D. 44; Railroad v. Altemeier, 60 Ohio St. 10; Railroad v. Burnett, 38 S.W. 813; Railroad v. White, 56 S.W. 204; Railroad v. Knight, 52 S.W. 640; Railroad v. Davis, 54 S.W. 909; Thoresen v. Railroad, 94 Wis. 129; Cooper v. Railroad, 66 Mich. 261; Railroad v. Crudup, 63 Miss.......
-
Galveston, H. & H. R. Co. v. Sloman
...as bearing upon their reasonable expectation of aid from their son, and that it was sufficient to sustain the verdict. In Ry. Co. v. Knight, 52 S. W. 640, Judge Pleasants says: "It is well settled that the pecuniary condition of the parent, in cases like this, may be shown as a reasonable g......
-
St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v. Inman
...that he had a right to expect pecuniary aid from the deceased. Railway Co. v. Bonnet (Tex. Civ. App.) 38 S. W. 813; Railway Co. v. Knight (Tex. Civ. App.) 52 S. W. 640; Railway Co. v. White, 23 Tex. Civ. App. 280, 56 S. W. 204; Railway Co. v. Davis, 22 Tex. Civ. App. 335, 54 S. W. 909; Rail......
-
Texas & Pacific Ry. Co. v. Day
...and St. Louis B. & M. R. Co. et al. v. Paine, supra, are digested there. There is likewise cited the case of International & G. N. R. Co. v. Knight, Tex.Civ.App., 52 S.W. 640. In the latter case one struck by a train coming another direction was held not guilty of contributory negligence as......