Meredith v. Richmond & D.R. Co.
| Decision Date | 28 April 1891 |
| Citation | 13 S.E. 137,108 N.C. 616 |
| Parties | Meredith v. Richmond & D. R. Co. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from superior court, Madison county; Philips, Judge.
Action by W. J. Meredith against the Richmond & Danville Railroad Company for damages for personal injuries. The defendant company, in constructing its road from Hot Springs to Paint Rock, had used what had previously been the public highway and just below Hot Springs had put in two side tracks in addition to the main line, extending some distance down the road. The plaintiff, W. J. Meredith, who sues by his next friend, Nichols Meredith, his father, was shown by all of the witnesses to be a bright boy, about 13 years old. In going from the house of his father to Hot Springs he was compelled to pass along the defendant's road, where the three tracks were laid down, and at a short distance on either side of said tracks there were lines of wire fence. When on the way from his father's house to Hot Springs he passed a train apparently heading towards Paint Rock, and not long after, seeing another train coming from Hot Springs in his front on the track on which he was walking, he stepped over to the side track on which the train first seen by him was running, but failed to see it approaching him from his rear till it ran against and injured him. He might have stepped off the track and avoided the injury, had he seen the train coming up behind him. He was struck by the engine, and his arm was crushed, and afterwards amputated. When the plaintiff rested his case the judge instructed the jury that he could not recover. The plaintiff submitted to judgment of nonsuit and appealed.
In an action against a railroad company for personal injuries plaintiff, a bright boy of 13, showed that what had previously been a highway had been filled for a considerable distance by defendant's tracks; that while walking thereon he passed a train going in the opposite direction and seeing another coming along the track on which he was walking, he stepped off, and was struck and injured by the backing of the first train, which he did not see. Held contributory negligence, and plaintiff was properly nonsuited.
F. H. Busbee, for appellee.
Where the engineer in charge of a moving engine sees a human being walking along the track in front of it, if such person is unknown to him, and is apparently old enough to understand the necessity for care and watchfulness, under such circumstances, the engineer may act upon the assumption that he will step off the track in time to avoid injury. McAdoo v. Railroad Co., 105 N.C. 140, 11 S.E. Rep 316; Parker v. Railroad Co., 86 N.C. 221. The witnesses concur in the statement that the boy who was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ward v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.
...are numerous and this partial array of them will prove it. McAdoo v. Railroad, supra; Parker v. Railroad, 86 N.C. 221; Meredith v. Railroad, 108 N.C. 616, 13 S.E. 137; Norwood v. Railroad, 111 N.C. 236, 16 S.E. High v. Railroad, 112 N.C. 385, 17 S.E. 79; Syme v. Railroad, 113 N.C. 538, 18 S......
-
Talley v. Southern Ry. Co.
...train also at the station at this time, making it probable that one or the other would take the siding. In Meredith's Case also, 108 N.C. 616, 13 S.E. 137, plaintiff was injured on a side track, but it was by a train moving in the same direction and on same track as plaintiff, and which he ......
-
Davis v. Southern Ry. Co.
...him, citing Pepper v. Railroad Co., 105 Cal. 389, 38 P. 974, and Kelley v. Railroad, 75 Mo. 138; and to the same effect are Meredith v. Railroad Co., supra, Norwood v. Railroad Co., supra, which held that the trespasser or licensee must keep a sharp lookout for his own protection, and if he......
-
Crenshaw v. Asheville & B. Street Ry. & Transp. Co.
... ... 715, 25 S.E. 786; Pharr v. Railroad, 133 N.C. 610, ... 45 S.E. 1021; Meredith v. Railroad, 108 N.C. 616, 13 ... S.E. 137; Syme v. Railroad, 113 N.C. 558, 18 S.E ... 114; High ... ...