Legal Opinion

Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Hildebrand

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided July 15, 1893PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Error from Coffey District Court. Frederick Hildebrand, who was plaintiff below, while crossing the tracks of the Missouri 'Pacific Railway Company on F street, in Le Boy, received injuries, for which he brings this suit. F street runs north and south; the railroad tracks nearly east and west. The south track is called the “ house track,” and runs on the south side of the depot, which is located two blocks west of the crossing and of the water tank and coal chutes.

Read the full summary

Error from Coffey District Court. Frederick Hildebrand, who was plaintiff below, while crossing the tracks of the Missouri 'Pacific Railway Company on F street, in Le Boy, received injuries, for which he brings this suit. F street runs north and south; the railroad tracks nearly east and west. The south track is called the “ house track,” and runs on the south side of the depot, which is located two blocks west of the crossing and of the water tank and coal chutes. The next track is the main line, distant about 73 feet from the house track North of the main track are other sidings, which are…

1Opinion of the Court

Thé opinion of the court was delivered by

ARLEN, J.:

The first matter alleged as error is in permitting Otto Hines, who was in the section house a little distance north of the tracks, and who did not see the train at the time, but who heard the rattle and escape of steam from the engine, to testify as to the rate of speed at which it was going, and that it was going pretty fast. He stated that he was accustomed to seeing and hearing trains pass by, and could tell by the sound. We think there was no error in this ruling.

The jury found that the engine was running “at a rapid speed.” The testimony…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Inter-State Consolidated Rapid Transit Railway Co. v. FoxSupreme Court of Kansas · 1889

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Bennett v. Central California Traction Co.California Court of Appeal · 1931
  2. Smith v. DoyleCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
  3. Kuhn v. StephensonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1928

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API