Baird v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.

Citations

• 100 Wash. 384
• 170 P. 1016
• 1918 Wash. LEXIS 742

Syllabus

<p>Master and Servant—Federal Employers’ Liability Act—Contributory Negligence. In an action under the Federal employers’ liability act for the death of a section foreman, his contributory negligence is not a defense, but is to be compared with the defendant’s, leaving it to the jury to say whether there was any negligence on the part of the defendant, rather than to fix the proximate cause.</p> <p>Same—Federal Employers’ Liability Act—Negligence—Signals —Question eor Jury. In an action under the Federal employers’ liability act for the death of a section foreman, killed in a head end collision in a cut on a curve, whether the engineer signalled for the curve and cut, as required by the rules, in time to have avoided the accident, is a question for the jury, where it appears that, when the whistle was blown, the train and car' were 1,500 feet apart, and the testimony of defendant’s witnesses that a previous whistle was blown 3,000 feet from the cut is negatived by the testimony of other witnesses that they heard no such whistle although they heard the train and other whistles further away.</p> <p>Same—Negligence—Operation oe Trains—Violation oe Orders. An order requiring an engineer to signal for curves and cuts is for the protection of track employees as well as the public.</p> <p>Same—Operation oe Trains—Negligence — Signals — Violation oe Statute. In an action for the death of a section foreman, killed in a head end collision on a curve, the violation of the statute making it a misdemeanor for an engineer to fail to whistle at least eighty rods from a county road crossing is not negligence per se, since a whistle after passing the crossing might have given the deceased sufficient time to stop his car.</p> <p>Mount, J., dissents.</p>