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

Upon the testimony of plaintiff his own contributory negligence appears so clearly and conclusively as to require a reversal of the judgment and a dismissal of the action.

He was long familiar with this crossing. He approached *32it after dark at a speed of fifteen to eighteen miles an hour, at which rate he could bring his car to a stop in about two rods. He did not slacken his speed until after he entered the smoke which he claims shut off a view of the standing train, and at a point about one rod from it. Then, realizing that there was not sufficient time to stop, he turned sharply to the…