Hammer v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.

The following opinion was filed June 5, 1934:

Wickhem, J.

This appeal involves three questions: First, does the evidence sustain the verdict as to defendant’s *9negligence and its causal relation to decedent’s injury? Second, does the comparative negligence law apply to accidents at railroad crossings ? Third, was the negligence of the deceased, as a matter of law, as great or greater than that of the defendant?

It is our conclusion that the evidence sustains the finding that the train was proceeding at an unlawful rate of speed, and that it failed to sound the bell as required when approaching…