Union Pac Ry Co v. Callaghan

CourtU.S. Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtFULLER
CitationUnion Pac Ry Co v. Callaghan, 161 U.S. 91, 16 S.Ct. 493, 40 L.Ed. 628 (1896)
Decision Date02 March 1896
Docket NumberNo. 271,271
PartiesUNION PAC. RY. CO. v. CALLAGHAN

This was an action brought by James Callaghan against the Union Pacific Railway Company in the circuit court of the United States for the district of Colorado, to recover damages for injuries received by him through the alleged negligence of defendant. The evidence tended to establish these facts: On August 18, 1890, a repair train operated by defendant, consisting of five flat cars, loaded with timber to be used in repairing bridges, three box cars, and a coboose, in running from Trinidad to Trinchera went through a defective bridge, and Callaghan, who was riding on the train, was injured.

Heavy storms had prevailed during the preceding week, causing extensive washouts and damages to the roadbed and bridges, so that none but repair trains had passed over the line between Trinidad and Trinchera for three days.

Callaghan was a section foreman on a branch railroad from Trinidad to Sopris, and some time on August 17th he received orders from the superintendent of the railway company to take all the men in his section, and assist in repairing the line between Trinidad and Trinchera, and accordingly went to Trinidad, where he was joined by some other section foremen with their crews, all being under one De Remer, a contractor in the employment of the company, who had been called in to assist in repairing the road, but who had no control over the management of the train, which was in charge of a conductor with an engineer and fireman.

The train left Trinidad about 5 p. m., Sunday, the 17th, pursuant to orders received from the superintendent, then at Trinchera, and who had that day examined the bridge which subsequently fell, but, so far as appeared, gave no directions or warning to De Remer or the Trainmen in respect of its condition. The train proceeded slowly during the night, De Remer and a track walker going in front with a lantern, and before morning they found one bridge washed out and another rendered dangerous by floods, and repaired them. The bridge where the accident occurred was about half a mile north of Trinchera, and three miles south of Adair, another station on the road. The approaches at each end of it had been washed away for over 15 or 20 feet, so that it was unsafe. The foreman of that section discovered its condition on the 17th, and caused the usual danger signal, a red flag, to be placed along the road between the rails at about 700 feet north of the bridge, and its condition was known to the road master as well as to the superintendent before the train left Trinidad.

When the train reached Adair it was running about 15 miles an hour. The section foreman was there, and signaled the train to stop for the purpose of telling them about the bridge, and, if it had stopped, would have done so. The engineer saw his signal, and commenced to stop, and had slowed up to about four miles an hour, when the conductor signaled him to go ahead. The train then went on without giving the section foreman any opportunity to give information concerning the danger. The bridge could be seen for about 900 feet north on the road, but the engineer apparently neither saw its condition nor the red flag, but drove his train upon it, and the car upon which Callaghan was riding went through.

At the conclusion of defendant's evidence, except reading the rules, defendant asked the court to instruct the jury that there was no evidence sufficient to warrant a verdict for plaintiff, which request was denied, and defendant excepted. Defendant then introduced in evidence the company's rule 227, which read as follows:

'In case of an extraordinary rainstorm or high water trains must be brought to a stop, and a man sent out to examine bridges, trestles, culverts, and other points liable to damage, before passing over. Conductors will make careful inquiry at all stopping places, and, when thought advisable, make extra stops to ascertain the extent and severity of storms, taking no risk. In case of doubt as to the safety of proceeding, they will place their trains upon a siding, and remain there until certain it is safe to proceed.'

There...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex

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

vLex
17 cases
  • Campbell v. Weller
    • United States
    • Wyoming Supreme Court
    • May 7, 1917
    ... ... The evidence against which the ... motion was directed should be taken as true with every ... reasonable inference. ( Mulhern v. Union P. R. R ... Co., 2 Wyo. 446; Mau v. Stoner, 10 Wyo. 126; ... Carney Coal Co. v. Benedict, 22 Wyo. 362.) When ... there is a slight doubt ... (38 Cyc. 1590, 1591; Grand Trunk Ry. Co. v ... Cummings, 106 U.S. 700, 1 S.Ct. 493, 27 L.Ed. 266; ... U. P. Ry. Co. v. Callaghan, 161 U.S. 91, 16 S.Ct ... 493, 40 L.Ed. 628; Huellmantel v. Vinton, 112 Mich ... 47, 70 N.W. 412; Bernheimer v. Becker, 102 Md. 250, ... 62 ... ...
  • Southern Pac. Co. v. Hetzer
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • January 25, 1905
    ... ... Grant Trunk Ry. Co. v. Ives, 144 U.S. 408, 416, 417, ... 12 Sup.Ct. 679, 36 L.Ed. 485; Union Pac. R. Co. v ... Daniels, 152 U.S. 684, 691, 14 Sup.Ct. 756, 38 L.Ed ... 597; Washington, etc., Ry. Co. v. McDade, 135 U.S ... 554, 569, 10 ... not here for our consideration, and they are dismissed ... Union Pacific Ry. Co. v. Callaghan, 161 U.S. 91, 95, ... 16 Sup.Ct. 493, 40 L.Ed. 628; Waples-Platter Co. v ... Turner, 27 C.C.A. 439, 441, 83 F. 64, 66 ... [135 F. 286.] ... ...
  • Hovey v. Sanders
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • February 13, 1915
    ...charges is practically identical with that followed in the federal court and in several of the state courts. In Railway v. Callaghan, 161 U. S. 91, 16 Sup. Ct. 493, 40 L. Ed. 628, the court said: "Again, it is firmly established that, where propositions submitted to a jury are excepted to e......
  • State v. Stewart.
    • United States
    • New Mexico Supreme Court
    • February 9, 1929
    ...3687; 38 Cyc. pp. 1590, 1591; 26 R. C. L., Trial, § 87; Walker, Errors in Criminal Procedure, p. 28(h); Union Pac. Railway Co. v. Callaghan, 161 U. S. 91, 16 S. Ct. 493, 40 L. Ed. 628; Hansen v. Boyd, 161 U. S. 397, 16 S. Ct. 571, 40 L. Ed. 746; State v. Asbury, 172 Iowa, 606, 154 N. W. 915......
  • Get Started for Free