Taylor v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
Decision Date | 25 November 1946 |
Docket Number | 36222. |
Citation | 200 Miss. 571,27 So.2d 894 |
Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Parties | TAYLOR v. ILLINOIS CENT. R. CO. |
S C. Mims, of Grenada, for appellants.
Cowles Horton, of Grenada, Lucius E. Burch, Jr. of Memphis, Tenn., Chas. A. Helsell and V. W. Foster, both of Chicago, Ill., for appellee.
Appellants brother and sister, sued appellee Railroad for damages resulting from the death of their brother, W. T. Taylor allegedly caused by the negligence of said Railroad. Both sides introduced evidence. At the close of the testimony, the learned trial judge granted the Railroad a peremptory instruction. The correctness of that action is the only question involved on this appeal.
The peremptory was granted under this state of facts: About seven o'clock on Monday Morning, September 14, 1942, the dead body of W. T. Taylor was discovered lying upon the outer edge of the cross-ties on the west side of the west rail of appellee's railroad track at a point about one hundred and twenty feet south of a crossing near Bryant, Mississippi. There was blood and human flesh on the west rail and crossties some six to eight feet north of the body indicating Taylor was struck by a train going south--at least, the physical facts would have justified such finding by the jury. But, it is also evident that if and when struck by the train, Taylor was outside and west of the west rail. The railroad track is practically straight for some two or three miles north of the point of this accident. Taylor had separated from two other parties at Bryant's crossing around eleven to eleven thirty o'clock on the night before the body was found the next morning, the other parties going to their homes east of the railroad and Taylor proceeding south on the railroad. All the parties were walking. Taylor was drunk or practically so. That was the last time he was seen alive. From the time of this separation to the time the body was found, two trains and only two, passed this point--one going south about 3:10 o'clock and the other north about 4:15. Both trains were manned by the same crew, the returning point being the City of Grenada, located a short distance south of the scene of the accident. The train whistled for the crossing; the headlights were in good condition, the engineer and firemen were keeping a proper lookout at this point, and they did not see the body of Taylor either going south or returning north. The first the train crew knew of the accident was late in the afternoon on Monday when informed of it by the county officers. It is further shown that a few feet north of where the body was struck, a sidetrack connects with and extends from the main line, and that the rails and ties of this switch-track, together with a 'frog' used, as we understand, to switch cars onto the side track, all being in close proximity to the rails and ties of the main line, result in much confusion in distinguishing objects in that vicinity--so much so that the fireman testified that a human body lying at the point where Taylor's...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Stapleton v. Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co.
...Code 1942 at pages 560-563. 4 Cf. Illinois Central R. Co. v. Gatis, 1947, 202 Miss. 624, 31 So.2d 902; Taylor v. Illinois Central R. R. Co., 1946, 200 Miss. 571, 27 So.2d 894; Columbus & G. R. Co. v. Cobbs, 1930, 156 Miss. 604, 126 So. 402; Bedford v. Louisville, N. O. & T. R. Co., 1888, 65......
-
Smith v. Illinois Cent. R. Co., 38352
...v. Robinson, 132 Miss. 841, 96 So. 749; Murray v. Louisville & Nashville R. Co., 168 Miss. 513, 151 So. 913; and Taylor v. Illinois Central R. Co., 200 Miss. 571, 27 So.2d 894. In none of these cases could an eyewitness be produced to testify that he saw the accident; but in each case the f......
-
Hartford Ins. Group v. Massey, 44963
...thereto including Dickerson v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 244 Miss. 733, 145 So.2d 913 (1962); Taylor v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, 200 Miss. 571, 27 So.2d 894 (1946); and Gulf, Mobile and Northern Railroad Company v. Jones,137 Miss. 631, 102 So. 385 (1925).) The testimony o......
-
Newman v. Missouri Pac. R. Co.
...are shown, the presumption of § 13-1-119 vanishes, leaving the burden of proof on the plaintiff. See, i. e., Taylor v. Illinois Central R. Co., 200 Miss. 571, 27 So.2d 894 (1946). That viewpoint was adopted by a panel of our Court in Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Allied Chemical Corp., 5......