Christensen v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co.

Citations

• 137 F. 708
• 70 C.C.A. 657
• 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4189

Syllabus

<p>1. Trial—Direction of Verdict—Questions of Negligence.</p> <p>While the questions of negligence and contributory negligence are. ordinarily questions of fact to be passed on by a jury, yet if it clearly appears from the undisputed facts, judged in the light of that common knowledge and experience of which courts are bound to take notice, that a party has not exercised such care as men of common prudence usually exercise in positions of like exposure and danger, or where the evidence is of such conclusive character that the court would be compelled to set aside a verdict in opposition to it, the case may properly be withdrawn from the jury.</p> <p>. [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 37, Cent. Dig. Negligence, §§ 279-346; vol. 46, Cent. Dig. Trial, §§ 379, 380, 383, 384, 391.]</p> <p>2. Street Railroads—Care in Equipment of Cars—Screens Protecting Windows.</p> <p>Screens with large meshes fastened across the lower half of the windows of a street ear on the side next to the poles supporting the trolley wires are a sufficient protection against the accidental injury of passengers from such poles, and a sufficient warning of the danger of such Injury to absolve the-railway company from the charge of negligence in that regard.</p> <p>3. Same—Injury of Passenger—Contributory Negligence.</p> <p>A passenger in a. street car who, on account of a sudden illness, extended her head through a window, above.a screen which covered the lower half of the window, and was injured by striking against a trolley pole beside the track, being obliged in order to so reach the window to stand up or kneel upon the seat, was chargeable with contributory negligence, as matter of law, which precludes a recovery against the company for the injury.</p> <p>[EcL Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 9, Cent. Dig. Carriers, § 1380.]</p>