Joyce v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad

Citations

• 230 Pa. 1
• 79 A. 171
• 1911 Pa. LEXIS 548

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Railroads—Standing near tracks — Contributory negligence — Evidence—Province of court and jury.</p> <p>1. In an action against a railroad company to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by an engine striking the plaintiff, the court must find as a matter of law that the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence, where it appears from her own testimony that in company with her sister she crossed the defendant’s tracks at a public crossing, at a point where she could have seen the engine for two hundred and fifty feet, that she took her stand in a space less than seven feet wide between the farthest track of the railroad and nearest track of a street railway, and that while waiting for a street car and when she was not confused she was struck by the engine, although her sister escaped without being touched.</p> <p>2. In order to justify the court in treating the question of contributory negligence as one of law, not only the facts but the inferences to be drawn from them must be free from doubt. On the other hand, when it is inconceivable that any two minds could rationally draw more than one conclusion from the established facts, then a decision contrary to such conclusion is merely capricious and cannot be sustained.</p>