Brown v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.

Citations

• 104 Kan. 505
• 180 P. 211
• 1919 Kan. LEXIS 301

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Negligence — Boy Drowned — Boy Employed by Foreman. The evidence is held to warrant a finding that a boy, who was drowned while assisting a party of railroad employees .in clearing the driftwood away from a well built of masonry resting on the bed of a river, had been employed by the foreman to render such service,</p> <p>2. Same — Rule of Railway Company against Employing Minors — Minor Entitled to Care and Protection. ' Notwithstanding a rule of a railway company forbidding the employment of minors without the written-consent of their parents or guardians, a minor who, without notice of such rule, performs services for the company at the instance of the person authorized to employ workmen for that purpose, is entit.ed, while so engaged, to the care and protection ordinarily duo from an employer to an employee. '</p> <p>3. Same — Evidence Warranted a Finding of Negligence. The evidence and findings are held to have warranted holding the defendant liable for the drowning of the plaintiff’s son, on i-te theory that its foreman was negligent in not warning him o 1 the danger he incurred in doing the work assigned him.</p> <p>4. Sam? — Objections to Instruction Not Well Taken. Objections held not to be well taken to an instruction to the effect that even if it after-wards turned out that the boy would have been saved if he had remained in the boat, but had jumped out of it at a time when it reasonably appeared to him that it was more- dangerous to stay with it than to leave it, this would not relieve the defendant of liability.</p>