Farrar v. New Orleans & Carrollton Railroad
Citations
- 52 La. Ann. 417
Syllabus
<p>Syllabus.</p> <p>Where the plaintiff heedlessly steps in front of a coming car without at all “looking” and “listening,” and then stopping in case of danger, he omits observing one of the rules laid down in a number of decisions, which should be complied with by a pedestrian when he is about to cross a track, i. e., to “look” and “listen.”</p> <p>While the failure to observe the rule does not relieve those in charge of the car from the necessity of.being careful at all times, none the less, in order that a plaintiff may recover damages it must appear that the danger was not seen by the motorneer at a time when he should have seen it, and that he did not make every exertion fo avoid the accident.</p> <p>The plaintiff enjoyed the faculties of sight and hearing unimpaired at an. advanced age. His steps were slow but the evidence does not show that his steps were so slow and1 feeble that he could not cross before the coming car, or that plaintiff would fail properly to use his senses of “hearing” and, “seeing” and undertake to make the crossing despite the danger to which it was attempted to call his attention by ringing the gong and loudly hallooing to him.</p> <p>The motorneer, while manning his car, had a right, to some extent, at least, to be governed by the belief that plaintiff would not seek to cross unless his strength was sufficient to enable him to cross before the arrival of the car.</p>
Judges: Breaux, Watkins
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.