Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co. v. Marshall

I regret that I cannot agree with the majority opinion in this case. I think there is ample evidence in the record upon which the jury could properly have based a conclusion that Sandridge, the engineer, if he had used ordinary care in keeping a lookout, either would have discovered the *743decedent, Marshall, in a position of peril in time to have avoided the accident, or would have seen the stop signal given him by the yard conductor.

The following testimony of the yard conductor, Mays, who was in charge of the movement of the engine, if believed, clearly establishes the fact that after Marshall…