Kansas City v. Kirksey
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Craighead Circuit Court. Hon. "W. H. Cate, Judge. 1. Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. 11 Exch.,784; 95 U. 8., 439; Cooley on Torts, p. 630. In the proof of negligence, plaintiff must first show the existence of a duty which defendant owed him, and then must show a…
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Craighead Circuit Court. Hon. "W. H. Cate, Judge. 1. Negligence is the omission to do something which a reasonable man, guided by those considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs, would do, or doing something which a prudent and reasonable man would not do. 11 Exch.,784; 95 U. 8., 439; Cooley on Torts, p. 630. In the proof of negligence, plaintiff must first show the existence of a duty which defendant owed him, and then must show a failure to observe this duty. Cooley on Torts, pp. 659, 661. Ordinary care in the m&nagement of 1heir trains is the measure…
1Opinion of the Court
Cockrill, 0. J.
This action was brought by the appel-1. lee against the railroad company to recover damages for an injury to his mule, caused by one of appellant’s moving trains. The plaintiff relied upon the statutory presumption of negligence, and the company undertook to overcome the presumption by the evidence of the train hands, to the effect that everything that could be done to prevent the accident, was done. There was, however, evidence tending to show that outside cf the ditch, at the foot of the embankment where the mule was killed, there was a clump of bushes on the company’s right…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Pittsburgh, Fort Wayne & Chicago Railway Co. v. BinghamOhio Supreme Court · 1876
- Hughes v. Hannibal & St. Jo. R. R.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Peoria, Pekin & Jacksonville R. R. v. ChampIllinois Supreme Court · 1874
- Illinois Central Railroad v. CarraherIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
- Dimick v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.Illinois Supreme Court · 1875
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co. v. NewmanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1910
- Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. OrrCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1925
- Shane v. Kansas City Southern Ry. Co.District Court, W.D. Arkansas · 1954
- Chicago, Burlington & Quincy R. Co. v. the WC HarmsDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 1954
- Galveston, H. & S. A. Ry. Co. v. GraceCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914