Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Brown, 4-2950.
| Decision Date | 03 April 1933 |
| Docket Number | No. 4-2950.,4-2950. |
| Citation | Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Brown, 59 S.W.2d 34, 187 Ark. 1163 (Ark. 1933) |
| Parties | MISSOURI PAC. R. CO. v. BROWN. |
| Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Izard County; John L. Bledsoe, Judge.
Action by Benton Brown against the Missouri Pacific Railroad Company. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
Affirmed.
This appeal is prosecuted from a judgment for damages for personal injuries suffered by appellee at a public crossing of appellant's tracks north of Newport.
Appellee brought suit alleging he was severely and permanently injured on the night of February 2, 1932, by being struck in an automobile by appellant's passenger train at the public crossing north of Newport; it being alleged that he was driving on the public highway leading south of Newport to the ferry, known as the Hinkle and Watson ferry, and that he was crossing the tracks at a regular public crossing going south and that the automobile was struck while he was driving same by said train throwing him violently from the car and causing him to be seriously and permanently injured. The negligence alleged was that the servants of the railroad company in charge of the train failed to sound the whistle and ring the bell and to keep same sounding continuously as required by law upon approaching said crossing. That the night was damp, foggy, and cold; that the incline in the approach of the crossing was very high, and on that account the plaintiff could not see the approaching train. That he stopped at said crossing, looked and listened, and did not see nor hear an approaching train from either direction. That the train was running 45 or 50 miles per hour at the time it struck his car and did not slow up as it approached the crossing.
Appellant denied all the allegations of the complaint and pleaded contributory negligence of appellee in failing to look and listen before going on the crossing, and in failing to exercise ordinary care to ascertain whether a train was approaching and in going upon the track without using ordinary care for his own safety.
Appellee testified that he had lived in Newport for 15 years, had never lived in Stone or Izard counties, and came from Batesville to Newport. On the night of the injury he was going to Hines' ferry some time after dark after he had quit work and gone home to supper. After reaching home he ascertained that his sister-in-law was sick and his wife wanted him to go to Hinkle farm and get her father, which he did. ...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Shell
... ... Watt, 186 Ark. 86, 52 S.W.2d 634; Missouri ... Pacific Railroad Company v. Brown, 187 Ark ... 1163, 59 S.W.2d 34; Texas & Pacific Railway Company ... v. Stephens, 192 Ark. 115, ... ...
-
Missouri Pac. R. Co. v. Shell
...181 Ark. 777, 27 S. W.2d 1021; Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Watt, 186 Ark. 86, 52 S.W.2d 634; Missouri Pacific Railroad Company v. Brown, 187 Ark. 1163, 59 S.W.2d 34; Texas & Pacific R. Co. v. Stephens, 192 Ark. 115, 90 S.W.2d 978; Missouri Pacific Railroad Company et al. v. Westerf......
-
Johnson v. Poinsett Lumber & Manufacturing Co.
... ... Co. v ... Corbin's Admr., 110 Va. 700, 67 S.E. 179; ... Mo. Pac". Ry. Co. v. Skipper, 174 Ark. 1083, ... 298 S.W. 849 ... \xC2" ... ...