Brommer v. Pennsylvania R.
Citations
- 179 F. 577
- 1910 U.S. App. LEXIS 4678
Syllabus
<p>1. Railroads (§ 328*) — Accidents at Crossings — Care Required oe Automobile Driver — Duty to Stop, Look, and Listen.</p> <p>The duty of an automobile driver approaching a grade railroad crossing, where there is restricted vision to stop, look, and listen, and to do so at a time and place where stopping and where looking and where listening will be effective, is a positive duty.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — Eor other cases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. § 1057; Dee. Dig. § 328.*]</p> <p>2. Railroads (§' 328*) — Accidents at Crossings — Contributory Negligence —Driver oe Automobile.</p> <p>The driver of an automobile which was struck by a train at a grade crossing of railroad tracks was chargeable with contributory negligence which precludes his recovery from the railroad company for his injury, where, as he approached the crossing, his view of the tracks in the direction from which the train approached was obstructed by buildings and trees until he reached a point within 30 or 40 feet from the track, from which point he could have seen along the track for at least 500 feet, but he drove upon the crossing without stopping to look or listen.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — FOr Other cases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. § 1058; Dec. Dig. § 328.*]</p> <p>3. Railroads (§ 327*) — Accidents at Crossings — Contributory Negligence —Person Riding in Automobile Driven by Another.</p> <p>One riding in an automobile by invitation of the owner and driver, with whom he sat on the front seat, equally with such driver was required to exercise care for his own safety, and where without objection or protest he permitted the driver to negligently drive upon a railroad crossing immediately in front of an approaching train without stopping to look or listen, exercising no care on his own part to ascertain whether the crossing was safe, although the view of the track was obstructed until they reached a point only a few feet distant, he is chargeable with negligence contributing to his own injury by the striking of
Judges: Buffington
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
50 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Powell v. BerrySupreme Court of Georgia· 1916-08-21· cited 101×
- Bradley v. Missouri Pac. R.Eighth Circuit· 1923-03-28· cited 52×
- Jacobs v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Supreme Court of Kansas· 1916-02-12· cited 48×
- Hurt v. Yazoo & M. V. R.Tennessee Supreme Court· 1918-04-15· cited 40×
- Wentworth v. Town of WaterburySupreme Court of Vermont· 1916-01-18· cited 35×
- Young v. Louisiana Western R.Supreme Court of Louisiana· 1923-01-27· cited 33×
- Memphis St. Ry Co. v. CavellTennessee Supreme Court· 1916-04-15· cited 32×
- Beemer v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa· 1917-04-03· cited 30×
- Sadler v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.Washington Supreme Court· 1921-12-29· cited 26×
- Brown v. McAdooSupreme Court of Iowa· 1922-05-09· cited 24×
- Rebillard v. Minneapolis, St. P. & S. S. M. Ry. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1914-07-27· cited 24×
- Monforton v. Northern Pacific Railway CompanyMontana Supreme Court· 1960-08-11· cited 23×
- Martin v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1919-06-21· cited 22×
- Union Traction Co. v. GauntIndiana Supreme Court· 1922-05-16· cited 21×
- Walters v. Chicago, Milwaukee & Puget Sound Ry. Co.Montana Supreme Court· 1913-06-14· cited 21×
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Treanor's AdministratorCourt of Appeals of Kentucky· 1918-02-19· cited 20×
- Begert v. PayneSixth Circuit· 1921-07-19· cited 20×
- Incret v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific RailroadMontana Supreme Court· 1938-12-27· cited 19×
- Delaware, L. & W. R. v. WelshmanThird Circuit· 1915-12-09· cited 19×
- Mabray v. Union Pac. R. Co.D. Colorado· 1933-12-09· cited 18×
Cites
7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Little v. HackettSupreme Court· 1886-01-04· cited 220×
- New York Cent. & H. R. R. v. MaidmentThird Circuit· 1909-03-12· cited 64×
- Wills v. Manufacturers N. Gas Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1889-11-12· cited 63×
- Davis v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1907-11-25· cited 62×
- Township of Crescent v. AndersonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1887-02-07· cited 32×
- Berry v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey· 1886-03-15· cited 9×
- Farley v. Wilmington & New Castle Electric Railway Co.Superior Court of Delaware· 1902-06-24· cited 8×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.