Pollard v. Todd

While, as stated in the Georgia decisions, the company owed no duty to the plaintiff’s husband as a trespasser on its track until his presence became known to the servants of the defendant operating the train, and when his presence became known the only duty owed by them to him was not to wantonly and wilfully injure him, yet it has been held that the conduct of the operators of a railroad train, after a trespasser’s presence on the tracks is known to them, amounting to negligence, may amount to wilfulness and wantonness. “The only duty which a railroad company owes a trespasser is not to…