Yeager v. The Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Co.
Decision Date | 17 December 1894 |
Citation | 61 N.W. 215,93 Iowa 1 |
Parties | W. F. YEAGER, by His Next Friend, J. S. YEAGER, Appellant, v. THE BURLINGTON, CEDAR RAPIDS & NORTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY. [*] |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
Appeal from Cedar Rapids Superior Court.--HON. JOHN T. STONEMAN Judge.
Action to recover for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff, a minor, while in the employ of the defendant. When plaintiff had offered all his evidence, the court, on motion of the defendant, instructed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant. Plaintiff's motion for a new trial was overruled, and judgment entered on the verdict. Plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Rickel & Crocker and M. P. Smith for appellant.
S. K Tracy and J. C. Leonard for appellee.
I.
The questions discussed involve a consideration of the facts as shown in the evidence, and which are substantially as follows: Prior to November 2, 1891, the plaintiff, then over nineteen years of age, applied to the defendant's train master for employment, and was promised a position when a vacancy occurred. Later, he was informed that there was a place for him, but that he must have his father's written consent that he be employed, which consent he obtained. On November 2, 1891, he was directed to report for duty to the conductor of a certain freight train that was to go north from Cedar Rapids about 10 or 11 o'clock that night. On reporting, he was directed to take the place of front brakeman, without any instructions having been given him. When the train commenced to move, plaintiff was on the ground, in advance of it, and it occurred to him that a brake on the front car--a box car--was set, and should be loosened and he attempted to mount the car by the side ladder on the front end, for that purpose. The night was damp and foggy, and at the time plaintiff attempted to mount the car it was enveloped in steam from the engine so that he could see but little, if any, by the light of the lantern he carried. The train was moving north and plaintiff attempted to mount the car on the east side, by catching the ladder and placing his left foot against the oil box, preparatory to putting his right into the stirrup at the foot of the ladder. His foot slipped off the oil box, and jerked his hold upon the ladder loose before he got the other foot in the stirrup; thus causing him to fall with one foot across the rail, which foot was run over, and injured so as to necessitate amputation. At the time plaintiff was employed it was known to defendant's train master who employed him that he had no practical experience in train service as brakeman or otherwise. Plaintiff was a young man of at least ordinary physical strength and intelligence, had been in school for some fourteen years, and had lived near to defendant's line all his life, his father being employed by defendant as a trackman during part of that time. For some time preceding his injury he had been in employments near to railroad yards and tracks, where he could and did observe, to some extent, the manner in which trainmen performed their duties. He says: "I had frequently seen brakemen climb on the cars with the ladder at the side, and put their foot on the oil box." The evidence as to the way in which to mount a moving box car is as follows: Another witness states it thus:
II. Following the order pursued in the arguments, our first inquiry is whether there is such evidence of either of the acts of negligence charged as that the court should have overruled defendant's motion for a verdict. In Meyer v. Houck,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Carney Coal Company v. Benedict
... ... Eldredge, 36 N.E. 469; Yeager v. Burlington &c. R ... Co., 61 N.W. 215; ... gravitation. In Swanson v. Great Northern Ry. Co., ... 68 Minn. 184, 70 N.W. 978, it is ... ...
-
Louisiana & A. Ry. Co. v. Miles
...v. Russell Wheel & Foundry Co., 108 Mich. 286, 66 N. W. 50; Ferguson v. Phœnix Cotton Mills, 106 Tenn. 236, 61 S. W. 53; Yeager v. Railway Co., 93 Iowa, 1, 61 N. W. 215; E. T., V. & G. Ry. Co. v. Turvaville, 97 Ala. 122, 12 South. 63; Ill. Cent. Ry. Co. v. Price, 72 Miss. 862, 18 South. Now......
-
Louisiana & Arkansas Railway Co. v. Miles
...Wheel & Foundry Co., 108 Mich. 286, 66 N.W. 50; Ferguson v. Phoenix Cotton Mills, 106 Tenn. 236, 61 S.W. 53; Yeager v. Burlington & Cedar Rapids Railway Co., 93 Iowa 1, 61 N.W. 215; East Tennessee, Va. & Ga. Ry. Co. Turvaville, 97 Ala. 122, 12 So. 63; Ill. Cent. Ry. Co. v. Price, 72 Miss. 8......
-
Wilder v. Great Western Cereal Co.
...v. Mulgrew, 107 Iowa 76, 77 N.W. 527; Hanson v. Hammell, 107 Iowa 171, 77 N.W. 839; Newbury v. Mfg. Co., 100 Iowa 441, 69 N.W. 743; Yeager v. Ry., 93 Iowa 1; Beck v. Mfg. 82 Iowa 286, 48 N.W. 81. The plaintiff undoubtedly knew there were rolls within the wooden casing or housing, and as he ......