Brown v. Seattle City Railway Co.

Citations

• 16 Wash. 465
• 47 P. 890
• 1897 Wash. LEXIS 345

Syllabus

<p>STREET RAILWAYS — INJURY TO PASSENGER ALIGHTING EROM CAR-DUTY OE CARRIER — CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE—PLEADING — INSTRUCTIONS.</p> <p>When plaintiff, in an action for damages for injuries incurred through the negligence of defendant, negatives contributory negligence in his complaint and in his reply denies the affirmative defense of contributory negligence set up by defendants, instead of demurring thereto, he cannot on the trial object to the introduction of evidence of contributory negligence on the ground that the answer does not state facts sufficient to constitute such defense.</p> <p>Whether or not a passenger has been negligent in alighting from a street car is a question of fact for the jury to determine, and, where there is a substantial conflict in the testimony, their verdict should not be disturbed.</p> <p>A railway company is liable for any damage suffered by a passenger in alighting from its cars, which is proximately caused by the failure of such carrier to use the highest degree of prudence, care and caution to avoid injury to the passengers, if negligence on the part of the passenger has not contributed to the injury.</p> <p>Where instructions, when construed together, fairly state the law as applied to the facts of the case, a misleading statement in one instruction cannot be regarded as prejudicial.</p>