McKern v. Wabash Railroad
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the CourtWeaver, J.
Appellant concedes that plaintiff made a case for the jury, in so far as the petition charges negligence in fail*411ing to give proper signal or warning of the train’s approach to the crossing on which the deceased was killed, but contends that the latter was chargeable with contributory negligence, as a matter of law. We shall, therefore, confine our discussion to the issue as thus limited.
At the place in question, the natural surface of the ground is somewhat rough and uneven. The crossing is in a cut, both track and highway being lower than the natural contour of the surface. The embankment of…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. IvesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Continental Improvement Co. v. SteadSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Chicago City Railway Co. v. FennimoreIllinois Supreme Court · 1902
- Moore v. Chicago, St. Paul & Kansas City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1897
- Platter v. Minneapolis & St. Louis RailroadSupreme Court of Iowa · 1913
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Leinen v. BoettgerSupreme Court of Iowa · 1950
- Beach v. City of Des MoinesSupreme Court of Iowa · 1947
- Rice v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Iowa · 1965
- Scherer v. ScandrettSupreme Court of Iowa · 1944