Keys v. Schaff

Citations

• 107 Kan. 620
• 193 P. 322
• 1920 Kan. LEXIS 133

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Negligence — Railroad Crossing — Contributory Negligence a. Question of Faet for Jury. At a railroad crossing over a much used street in a city there were three railroad tracks. The plaintiff approached the crossing, driving his automobile slowly, and, looking for trains, saw none on the first track, which was the main line, and he proceeded across that track. On the second track he observed a box car standing partly in the street where it had been left for several hours, but there was no engine or car attached to it. A switch engine was being shifted about in the yard, at the time being upon the second track a short distance away, and although plaintiff says he did not observe it, it could have been seen by him before he started over the second track. While he was passing over that track the switch engine backed and bunted an uncoupled car against the stationary car standing partly in the street, causing it to strike and injure plaintiff’s automobile. There was no flagman at the crossing, and no lookout on the ends of the moving cars, nor was any warning given of the intention to bunt the stationary car across the street. Under the circumstances it is held that whether the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence was a question of fact for the determination of the jury.</p> <p>2. Same — Rulings on Special Questions — Not Error. The refusal of the trial court to require more definite answers to certain special questions is held not to be prejudicial error.</p>