Wick v. Cent. Of Ga. Ry. Co
| Decision Date | 10 July 1912 |
| Docket Number | (No. 4,037.) |
| Citation | 11 Ga.App. 823,75 S.E. 162 |
| Parties | WICK . v. CENTRAL OF GEORGIA RY. CO. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Railroads (§ 326*)—Accident at Crossing —Contributory Negligence—Proximate Cause of Injury.
As a matter of law, for a grown man in full possession of his faculties to attempt in the nighttime to climb over the bumpers between two cars attached to a long freight train, without ascertaining whether an engine is attached to the train of cars, or is so near to them on the track as to be immediately coupled to them, is such gross negligence as will preclude a recovery for injuries received on account of an engine being suddenly backed up against the cars and causing the person attempting to cross to be thrown down upon the track. In such a case the facts that the train was obstructing a public crossing in a city in violation of a municipal ordinance, and that the train had no lights to indicate that it was likely to move, or that no watchman was present to warn pedestrians not to attempt to cross, or that no bell or whistle was sounded to indicate preparation to move, afford the person injured no cause for complaint. The proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury was. not the alleged negligent acts and omissions of the defendant, but his own rash act. The case is in principle controlled by the decisions of the Supreme Court in Andrews v. Central R. Co., 86 Ga. 192, 12 S. E. 213, 10 L. R. A. 58, Mont gomery v. Railway Co., 94 Ga. 332, 21 S. E. 571, and Russell v. Central Ry. Co., 119 Ga. 705, 46 S. E. 858.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Railroads. Cent. Dig. §§ 1037-1042; Dec. Dig. § 326.*]
Error from City Court of Savannah; Davis Freeman, Judge.
Action by Nicholas Wick against the Central of Georgia Railway Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.
Osborne & Lawrence and Bonhan & Herzog, all of Savannah, for plaintiff in error.
Lawton & Cunningham and H. W. Johnson, all of Savannah, for defendant in error.
POTTLE, J. Judgment affirmed.
RUSSELL, J. (specially concurring). Personally I am of the opinion that the allegations of the plaintiff present an issue of fact for the exclusive determination of the jury, but in view of the rulings of the Supreme Court in Andrews v. Central Railroad & Banking Co., 86 Ga. 192, 12 S. E. 213, 10 L. R. A. 58, and cases therein cited, I am compelled to concur in the judgment.
*.For other cases see same topic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key No....
To continue reading
Request your trial