Keppler v. New York Central Railroad

263 A.D. 199, 32 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6845
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJanuary 7, 1942
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 263 A.D. 199 (Keppler v. New York Central Railroad) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Keppler v. New York Central Railroad, 263 A.D. 199, 32 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6845 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1942).

Opinions

Crapser, J.

The action is brought under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act to recover damages for the death of the plaintiff’s intestate, employed by the defendant as a fire patrolman, which occurred on May 25, 1939, at two-five p. m., when he was struck and instantly killed by a train at Stever’s Crossing between Craryville and Philmont while sitting upon a velocipede.

The complaint alleged many acts of negligence. The case was submitted to the jury upon the question of whether or not the defendant was guilty of any negligence which was the proximate cause of the accident. The main question presented to them was whether or not a sufficient warning of the approach of the train was given to the plaintiff’s intestate; whether or not the train was operated at an excessive rate of speed and the failure of the engineer to stop after he became aware of the peril of the deceased.

The Harlem Division of the defendant’s railroad, extending from New York city to Chatham in Columbia county, is a single-track railroad, and at the place of the accident extends in a southerly and northerly direction. It crosses a country highway, running substantially east and west, at Stever’s Crossing which is located 1.38 miles south of Philmont and 5.79 miles north of Craryville.

Approaching the crossing from the south the track is on a down grade for a distance of at least 1,600 feet. South of the crossing the track passes through a rock cut, on a left-hand curve going north, entirely obstructing the view of the crossing -until a point is reached 430 feet south of the crossing, from which point it can first be seen. The curve commences 600 feet south of the crossing and extends 400 feet north of it.

At the northeast side of the crossing there is located an electric crossing bell which rings automatically when a north-bound train reaches the circuit about 2,500 feet south of the crossing.

The deceased had been employed by the defendant as a section hand for about ten years, and during the months of April and May of those years, excepting 1935, he was employed as a fire patrolman between Philmont and a point about one mile north of Craryville, a total distance of about six miles. His duties as a fire patrolman [201]*201were to follow steam, trains and to extinguish any fires that might occur along the right of way. He was furnished with a velocipede with which to patrol the track. This consisted of a vehicle weighing 150 pounds with three wheels. It was operated by pumping with the hands and feet. The seat was located over the rail upon which the two wheels ran, the third wheel running on the opposite rail.

On the day of the accident south-bound train No. 22 left Philmont at one-forty-four p. m., according to the time table, a copy of which had been furnished to the deceased, and was scheduled to meet train No. 79, a north-bound train, at Craryville which was located 7.17 miles south of Philmont.

Just as train No. 22 was departing from the Philmont station and the deceased was at the ticket window in the waiting room the station agent asked him., Where are you going? ” and the deceased said, I am going to head for Craryville,” and the station agent said, “ You haven’t any time to go to Craryville, my boy; it is late; 22 and 79 are meeting at Craryville; you had better stay here.” The deceased said, “ To hell with 79, I can go to Stever’s,” and at that he went out the door and onto the track and he left a minute or two after train No. 22 had left and followed 22 south.

Another fire patrolman, who was cutting brush, saw No. 22 go south and he saw the deceased on his velocipede going ten or twelve miles an hour three or four minutes behind it. The deceased was also seen by a farmer going south towards Stever’s Crossing. In about fifteen minutes the farmer heard blasts of a whistle and saw the train going north to Philmont. He did not. hear or see the accident but was called to the scene of the accident by the conductor and saw the body of the deceased lying ninety feet north of the crossing on the west side of the track.

Train No. 22, south bound, was seven minutes late leaving Philmont, and was seven minutes late when it arrived at Craryville.

Train No. 79, a single unit rail motor car, known as “ M9,” propelled by a gasoline motor, the crew consisting of an engineer and a conductor, was scheduled to leave Craryville, north bound, as soon as train No. 22 passed that station. It was scheduled to leave at one-forty-eight but did not leave until one-fifty-seven p. m. As it approached Stever’s Crossing it came to a whistling post 1,367 feet south of the crossing where the engineer turned on the bell operated automatically by air and at the whistling post commenced to sound the whistle. He blew two long and one short blasts and was about to blow the last short blast when he saw the velocipede on the crossing. He was then coming around the curve, through the rock cut, and was 350 to 400 feet from the crossing. He applied the brakes in emergency, opened the sand and continued to sound short [202]*202blasts on the whistle. A man was sitting on the velocipede over the left or west rail, with his arm on the handle and his head down on his arm. The man never moved and the brakes were applied fully when he first saw the object on the crossing. The deceased was struck and thrown to the left and instantly killed. The train came to a stop 600 feet north of the crossing and backed up to the crossing where the body of the deceased was found west of the track about ninety feet north of the crossing.

The custom and practice among fire patrolmen was to remove the velocipede when trains came along and to keep out of the way of trains moving in both directions. They did not have any train orders but followed the trains and looked out for other trains. ■

The rules required fire patrolmen to protect themselves against the dangers of train movements. This was known to the deceased because he had been a fire patrolman for a number of years and had taken a written examination in the rules in March of 1939. The station agent at Philmont had given him the information about the operation of the trains and that train No. 79 would be coming from Craryville to Philmont as soon as train No. 22 arrived at Craryville. He knew that train No. 22 would arrive at Craryville long before he could arrive there and he was warned by the station agent at Philmont not to go out but to wait there but he said that he could make Stever’s Crossing.

The case of Chesapeake & Ohio R. Co. v. Nixon (271 U. S. 218) holds that where a section foreman, whose duty it was to inspect and ■ repair the track, was permitted by the railroad to use a velocipede in going to work, he assumed the risk of injury by trains, and was required to rely on bis own watchfulness to keep out of the way; the rule being the same as if he was actually engaged in his work of inspecting the track.

“ For reasons that the jury found insufficient to excuse the omission, the engineer and fireman of the train were not on the lookout, and the question raised is whether as toward the deceased the defendant owed a duty to keep a lookout, or whether on the other hand the deceased took the risk.” It was held that the risk was assumed by the deceased. (Chesapeake & Ohio R. Co. v. Nixon, supra; Carfelo v. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co., 54 F. [2d] 475.)

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Murray v. Donlan
77 A.D.2d 337 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
263 A.D. 199, 32 N.Y.S.2d 673, 1942 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6845, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keppler-v-new-york-central-railroad-nyappdiv-1942.