Paragould Southeastern Railway Co. v. Crunk
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court; Allen Hughes, Judge; Appellee’s horse was on appellant’s track, and, being frightened by an appraoching train, ran into a trestle, and was injured. Ther.e was evidence tending to prove that the train could have been stopped in time to have avoided .frightening the horse.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court; Allen Hughes, Judge; Appellee’s horse was on appellant’s track, and, being frightened by an appraoching train, ran into a trestle, and was injured. Ther.e was evidence tending to prove that the train could have been stopped in time to have avoided .frightening the horse. The jury found that appellant was guilty of negligence, and judgment was rendered accordingly, from which appellant had appealed. 1. A railway company is only required to use ordinary care to avoid injuring stock after it is discovered on its track. And the proof is clear and convincing that…
1Opinion of the CourtHiee, C. J.
The principal question in this case is the correctness of this instruction:
You are instructed that if you find from the evidence, that plaintiff’s horse was run into a trestle or culvert by a train on defendant’s road and injured, and if you further find, from all the facts and circumstances in proof in the case, that the trainmen in charge of the train could have foreseen, as a natural or probable consequence of not stopping the train, that the horse would attempt to go on the trestle or culvert and be injured, then it was the duty of the trainmen to stop the train' in order to avert the…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. StilesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1923
- Missouri Pacific Railroad v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1933
- St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Co. v. PaceSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1921