Union Pacific Railroad v. McCullough

Supreme Court of Kansas

Union Pacific Railroad v. McCullough

91 P. 1333, 77 Kan. 843, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 202

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedJuly 5, 1907

DocketNo. 15,116

StatusPublished

This text of 91 P. 1333 (Union Pacific Railroad v. McCullough) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Union Pacific Railroad v. McCullough, 91 P. 1333, 77 Kan. 843, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 202 (kan 1907).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

In this case the defendants in error recovered judgment for $3375 for the negligence of the railroad company’s trainmen which resulted in the killing of their son at a crossing in Solomon. The defense was a general denial and contributory negligence. The evidence has been examined and found sufficient to sustain the finding of negligence on the part of the trainmen. It appears from the evidence and findings that the heads of the team the boy was driving were over or across the first rail of the track upon which the train which killed him was approaching when it was first possible for him to see the approaching train; that he immediately whipped up and attempted to cross ahead of the train, but his wagon was struck by the engine and he was killed. The circumstances were such that it was peculiarly a question of fact for the jury whether the boy exercised reasonable care to discover the approach of the train and whether he did what a reasonably prudent person would do under all the circumstances to avoid the danger after he discovered the approaching train. We cannot say that their findings are not supported by evidence nor that under the undisputed facts the boy was guilty of contributory negligence.

The trial errors assigned have been examined, and we find nothing to justify a reversal of the case. The judgment is therefore affirmed.

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

Per Curiam:

In this case the defendants in error recovered judgment for $3375 for the negligence of the railroad company’s trainmen which resulted in the killing of their son at a crossing in Solomon. The defense was a general denial and contributory negligence. The evidence has been examined and found sufficient to sustain the finding of negligence on the part of the trainmen. It appears from the evidence and findings that the heads of the team the boy was driving were over or across the first rail of the track upon which the train which killed him was approaching when it was first possible for him to see the approaching train; that he immediately whipped up and attempted to cross ahead of the train, but his wagon was struck by the engine and he was killed. The circumstances were such that it was peculiarly a question of fact for the jury whether the boy exercised reasonable care to discover the approach of the train and whether he did what a reasonably prudent person would do under all the circumstances to avoid the danger after he discovered the approaching train. We cannot say that their findings are not supported by evidence nor that under the undisputed facts the boy was guilty of contributory negligence.

The trial errors assigned have been examined, and we find nothing to justify a reversal of the case. The judgment is therefore affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

91 P. 1333, 77 Kan. 843, 1907 Kan. LEXIS 202, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/union-pacific-railroad-v-mccullough-kan-1907.