Grant v. Oregon Railroad & Navigation Co.

Citations

• 54 Wash. 678
• 103 P. 1126
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 1055

Syllabus

<p>Railroads — Crossings — Negligence — Warning—Evidence—Suepiciency. The evidence is sufficient to show negligence upon the part of a railroad company in switching cars at a public crossing where people were in the habit of crossing, when no warning was given by bell, whistle, or lookout on the freight car backed upon the crossing,</p> <p>Same — Contributory Negligence — Failure to Look and Listen — • Acts in Emergency. One run down at a railroad crossing is not guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law, in going upon the track without stopping to look or listen, where she had just alighted from a buggy, her attention was diverted by the fright of the horses, and she involuntarily backed onto the track in an endeavor to get out of the way of the team.</p> <p>Same — Question eor Jury. A woman is-not guilty of contributory negligence, as a matter of law, in alighting from a buggy within six to ten feet from a railroad crossing in a place of safety, but so close' that she was crowded onto the track by the fright of the horses, where there was no indication of an approaching train likely to frighten the horses, which were used to trains and ordinarily gentle.</p> <p>Evidence — Declaration—Res Gestae. In an action for personal injuries sustained at a railroad crossing, the rejection of evidence of declarations of the train crew, offered as part of the res gestae, is discretionary.</p>