Johnson v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company

Hart, J.,

(after stating the facts). Counsel for the plaintiff contends that the court erred in giving instructions Nos. 3, 6 and 7 at the request .of the defendant. These instructions read as follows:

“3. You are instructed that it is not the duty of the defendant to have any person constantly inspecting its switch-lights and switch-stands, but that if, in the usual course of its business, and without negligence, the defendant placed a light in the proper manner on its switch at Upscn, and had the switch properly locked and lighted for the main line, and that some person, without notice to the…