Legal Opinion · Dissent

Carroll v. Union Pacific Railroad

Washington Supreme Court

Decided March 4, 1944No. 29221Published

1DissentBlake, J.

(dissenting) — That the defendant was negligent in maintaining a condition on its right of way which obscured the vision of travelers approaching the crossing, is apparently conceded. In such a situation it has been held by this court that the question of contributory negligence is for the jury. Ladouceur v. Northern Pac. R. Co., 6 Wash. 280, 33 Pac. 556, 1080; Steele v. Northern Pac. R. Co., 21 Wash. 287, 57 Pac. 820; Stewart v. Northern Pac. R. Co., 96 Wash. 486, 165 Pac. 377; Hubenthal v. Spokane & Inland Empire Co., 97 Wash. 581, 166 Pac. 797. Speaking for the court in the Steele case,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Grand Trunk Railway Co. v. IvesSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
  2. Steele v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1899
  3. Stewart v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1917
  4. Ladouceur v. Northern Pacific RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1893
  5. Hubenthal v. Spokane & Inland Empire RailroadWashington Supreme Court · 1917

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API