M. & L. R. R. R. v. Kerr
Supreme Court of Arkansas
APPEAL from Prairie Circuit Court, Southern District. M. T. Sanders, Judge. It is not the duty of a railroad to keep a lookout for stock over its whole right of way, or to bring the train under control whenever an animal is seen in proximity to the track.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Prairie Circuit Court, Southern District. M. T. Sanders, Judge. It is not the duty of a railroad to keep a lookout for stock over its whole right of way, or to bring the train under control whenever an animal is seen in proximity to the track. A railroad’s duty to guard against injuries to animals first arises when the animal first gets upon the track. 48 Ark., 370; 36 id., 607; 37 id'., 393; 39 id., 413; 40 id., 336; 41 id., 161. The evidence shows gross carelessness on the part of the engineer. Of course the bushes were conveniently by the side of the track, according to the…
1Opinion of the CourtHughes, J.
This is an action to recover damages for the killing of a mule by the appellant’s engine.
The evidence for appellee tended to show that the mule was grazing upon the railroad track, and when the train approached within about one hundred and fifty feet of it, it ran down the track about seventy-five yards, and was struck by the engine and killed; that before it was struck the whistle was sounded several times, but that the speed of the train was not checked.
The evidence for the appellant tended to show that the engineer first saw the mule when it came on the track about one ^hundred and fifty…
2Cited by16 opinions
- Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. WashingtonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1892
- St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. BrownSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1912
- Bostwick v. Minneapolis & Pacific Railway Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1892
- Johnson v. StewartSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1896
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. MitchellSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.