Tuthill v. Northern Pacific Railroad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Appeal by defendant, Northern Pacific Bailroad Company, from an order of the District Court of Anoka county, Lochren, J.,made October 31, 1891, denying its motion for a new trial. A railroad crossing is in itself a warning of danger, and a person is bound to look and listen before going upon or attempting to cross the track.
Read the full summary
Appeal by defendant, Northern Pacific Bailroad Company, from an order of the District Court of Anoka county, Lochren, J.,made October 31, 1891, denying its motion for a new trial. A railroad crossing is in itself a warning of danger, and a person is bound to look and listen before going upon or attempting to cross the track. If the circumstances are such that a traveler’s sense of hearing would not apprise him of his danger, the duty to use his sight becomes the more imperative. Ordinary care, therefore, requires a traveler before going upon a railroad track to look and listen. If he fails to…
1Opinion of the CourtCollins, J.
Action to recover the value of certain cattle killed at a highway crossing by one of defendant’s locomotives. These cattle, with others, were being driven along the highway to herding grounds beyond the crossing by plaintiff’s daughter, who was on horseback. It is not claimed that from the evidence the jury were not justified in concluding that defendant’s servants were negligent, but the contention is that the jury were not warranted in finding that the young girl in charge of the cattle did not contribute to this negligence, so as to preclude a recovery. She was well acquainted with the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Hendrickson v. Great Northern Ry. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1892
- Beanstrom v. Northern Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1891
- Palmer v. St. Paul & Duluth RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- Harrison v. AdamsonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1892