Morgan v. Northern Pac. Ry. Co.
Decision Date | 20 May 1912 |
Docket Number | 2,099. |
Citation | 196 F. 449 |
Parties | MORGAN et al. v. NORTHERN PAC. RY. CO. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
This was an action by the widow and minor children of Charles Morgan, who was killed by one of the railway trains of the defendant in error. The accident occurred about 11 o'clock on the night of January 29, 1910, between South Tacoma and Tacoma, in the state of Washington, between which points the railroad company had a double track. Morgan resided on Junette street, in the city of Tacoma, and according to the uncontradicted evidence, to reach his home the customary way and the only practical method of travel was to take the Center street or Jefferson avenue car line to the terminus of the line, and from there to walk to his home by a regular path which led from the end of the street car line directly to the railway tracks of the defendant in error. It was the custom, and had been for many years, of the people who lived in the neighborhood where Morgan did, to take the path referred to to the roadway of the defendant in error and then follow that down to another trail which led to their homes. The evidence shows without conflict that on an average from 40 to 50 people, including Morgan, had been accustomed to use that route day and night for a great many years, and that the defendant railway company never objected thereto. Morgan was using that route at the time that he was killed and must therefore be regarded as a licensee and not as a trespasser. The evidence shows without conflict that the custom of the railway company was to send its trains into the city of Tacoma over the east-bound track and to send its trains going out of the city over the west-bound track, but that on the night in question the train that killed Morgan was directed to take the west-bound track at South Tacoma and was on that track at the time of the accident. It further appears without conflict in the evidence that the night in question was very dark and was windy, and it had been raining; that with Morgan there got off of the street car a Mrs. Doty and her daughter, who were neighbors of the deceased; and that the three started for their respective homes together and along the route that has been indicated. The record shows that 814 feet from where the trail from the end of the street car line strikes the railroad track there is a switch leading to the Willamette Casket building, and that from where that switch starts to the west end of the building is about 300 feet, and from the west end of the building to the Pine street crossing at South Tacoma is about 1,200 feet, and that at the Pine street crossing there is a two-degree curve in the railroad tracks, and that from the curve to the first trail mentioned the railroad tracks are practically straight. Morgan being dead, Mrs. Doty and her daughter were the only witnesses, so far as appears, to the accident, unless it be those who were upon the engine.
The locomotive engineer was called as a witness on behalf of the plaintiffs, and testified as follows:
Cross-examination:
The fireman was not called as a witness.
Mrs. Doty testified, among other things, as follows:
The witness testified that Morgan first walked between the two tracks, her daughter walking outside of the tracks and a little in advance, and the witness a little in the rear of Morgan, and that Morgan later stepped over into the middle of the west track. 'We were not talking,' said the witness, 'and being so dark, and I was not much acquainted with him, only knew him as a neighbor, and we had nothing to say, and just walked along quietly, when I happened to look up, just happened to look, and saw a dim light, and I knew that it was a moving light, and I remarked to Mr. Morgan, 'Mr. Morgan, you had better get off the track.' and that moment or second my daughter turned around to me in her path and says,
The witness further testified that she was sure that the train never made any sound of any sort. Being asked whether it had a headlight, the witness answered:
On cross-examination the witness testified that at the time Morgan was struck he was walking in the middle of the track; that she did not hear the train coming, but saw the moving light first; that the train was already around the curve when she first saw it. 'It was on a straight line,' said the witness. 'It was a very bad night. The wind was blowing some. I was walking most of the time with my head down, just as one naturally would. It was not windy enough for me to say it was a very windy night. It was a very dark night. It had rained in the city a little. * * * When I saw that light, I took it to be the light of the train and thought the engine was coming on that track. I remarked to Mr. Morgan, 'Better get off the track.' My daughter was ahead of me at the time, just a little in advance of me. I do not remember whether he said anything or not. If he did, I did not hear him. My daughter turned around and said I know the trains did not come down that track.
'
Myrtle Doty, the daughter, testified, among other things, as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Talley v. Southern Ry. Co.
...97 P. 744, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1224. Many other cases might be cited, some of them being in defendant's brief. The court said in Morgan v. Railroad, supra: "It altogether probable that he acted on the daughter's statement that the trains did not come down that track; but he had no right to ......
-
Moore v. Director General of Railroads
...97 P. 744, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1224. Many other cases might be cited, some of them being in defendant's brief. The court said in Morgan v. Railroad, supra: is altogether probable that he acted on the daughter's statement that the trains did not come down that track; but he had no right to d......
-
Abernathy v. Southern Ry. Co.
... ... See, ... also, Railroad v. Hart, 87 Ill. 529; Morgan v ... Railroad, 116 C. C. A. 223, 196 F. 449; Kinnare v ... Railway, 57 Ill.App. 153; White v ... ...
-
E. S. Hamilton v. Kansas City Southern Railway Company
... ... 215 Mo. 521; Murphy v. Railroad, 228 Mo. 83; ... Frye v. Railroad, 200 Mo. 377; Morgan v ... Railroad, 196 F. 449; McGanley v. Transit Co., ... 179 Mo. 583. (3) The humanitarian rule ... ...