Skip to main content
· 5/2/1911

Chesapeake & O. Ry. Co. v. Hawkins

Citations

  • 187 F. 568
  • 109 C.C.A. 258
  • 1911 U.S. App. LEXIS 4199

Syllabus

<p>1. Railroads (§ 376*) — Injuries to Trespassers — Care Required — Intentional Injury.</p> <p>In an action for injuries to a trespasser on a railroad right of way, plaintiff, in order to recover, is bound to show a want of ordinary care to avoid injury to him after his peril was discovered by the operatives of the train, but is not bound to show that his injury resulted from malicious or intentional wrongdoing on the part of such operatives.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Railroads, Cent. Dig. §§ 1275-1279; Dec. Dig, § 376.*]</p> <p>2. Railroads (§ 401*) — Persons on Right oe Way — Trespassers—Death-Instructions.</p> <p>In an action for death of a trespasser on a railroad bridge in endeavoring to escape from an approaching engine, an instruction that the burden was on plaintiff to show that deceased was on the tresfle, that he was discovered by the trainmen, and that, knowing he could not get off the bridge in time to avoid injury, they willfully and recklessly injured him, was properly refused, as requiring too high a degree of proof, both in requiring proof that the trainmen knew that decedent could not get off the bridge in lime to avoid injury, as well as that they willfully and recklessly injured him.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — -For other cases, see Railroads, Doc. Dig. § 403.*]</p> <p>S. Railroads (§ 401*) — Trespassers—-Death—Instructions.</p> <p>Where, in an action for death of a trespasser while attempting to escape from a railroad bridge in front of an approaching engine, the court charged that plaintiff was a trespasser and was negligent in being where he was, and that under such circumstances the operatives of the engine owed him no duty until they discovered him In peril, and then owed him the duty not to wantonly injure him, the court did not err in omitting from its general charge on the duty owed to decedent after his discovery by defendant’s servants that they owed him no duty, except not to wantonly injure him.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other ca

Judges: Connor

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.