Stevenson v. Chicago & A.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 01 January 1883
• Citation: 18 F. 493
• Parties: STEVENSON v. CHICAGO & A.R. CO.
• Court: United States Circuit Court, District of Missouri

18 F. 493

STEVENSON v. CHICAGO & A.R. CO.

United States Circuit Court, D. Missouri.

October Term, 1883

Tichenor Warner & Dean, for plaintiff.

McFarlane & Trimble and Gardiner Lathrop, for defendants.

KREKEL J., (charging jury.)

Mary Stevenson sues the Chicago & Alton Railroad Company for killing her husband, Charles Stevenson. The cause of action as stated in the declaration, is as follows: On the twenty-seventh day of February, 1883, Charles Stevenson, the husband of plaintiff, was in the employ of one Mead, who controlled an elevator on the grounds of the Chicago & Alton Railroad Company, and while engaged in unloading a car, using due care, was killed by the negligent running of a car of the defendant railroad company against the car Stevenson was unloading. The railroad company, in answering the charges made, denies all neglect, and avers that Stevenson, by his own carelessness, contributed to the injury of which he died. These pleadings, both declaration and answer, have been criticised. For the purposes of this trial they may be taken as sufficient, leaving any further consideration, if necessary, to be settled hereafter by the court.

The question you are to determine is, was the defendant railroad company neglectful in the performance of its duty, and did such neglect cause the death of Charles Stevenson? The plaintiff, the widow of Charles Stevenson, charges such neglect, and is bound to prove the charge to your satisfaction. The law does not presume negligence. Among the material points to be determined is the condition of the cars as they stood upon the corn track on the morning of the twenty-seventh of February, 1883. Were they coupled and properly secured by brakes? If they were, and the additional cars which were afterwards set upon the same track were handled with due care, defendant is not liable. For interferences, if any, by other than the railroad company employes, the company is not liable. If the employes of -he railroad company either failed to make the coupling or to set the brakes so as to secure the cars on the track, and one of them became detached in consequence of their neglect and ran down the track injuring the plaintiff's husband, the company is liable unless Stevenson contributed to the injury himself, as hereafter pointed out. From the mere coming down of the car, without any fault or neglect on the part of the employes of the railroad company, you cannot...