Lewis v. Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co.

Citations

• 89 Ohio St. (N.S.) 9

Syllabus

<p>Action by railway employe for personal injuries — Contributory negligence — Assumption of dangerous position — Directed verdict for company error — Negligence a question for jury, when— Court procedure.</p> <p>A railway yard foreman ordered an employe to work with another servant between two parallel tracks in the railroad yards where freight cars were repaired by the use of a pull-jack and chain, by means of which certain parts of a car were drawn together. The pull-jack had to be attached to the rail of the track opposite to the car, upon which another car was standing, so that it was necessary for the employes to go under the latter car between the trucks, in order to attach the pull-jack to the rail and also to detach it therefrom after the operation.</p> <p>The employe was twenty-one years old and he had never had any experience about railroad tracks or yards, and so informed the foreman when he was employed four days previous to his injury. The foreman exhibited to him the manner of attaching and using the pull-jack, but gave him no instruction as to the position he should take when operating the lever upon the pull-jack, and no warning that the cars might be suddenly jostled and started while he would be at work between them. He had thus worked with the pull-jaclc but two or three hours, and he was crouched down by the side of it between the tracks with one thigh upon the rail to which it was attached, when the car was suddenly bumped by others moving upon the track, and he was pinched under the wheel and injured. Held:</p> <p>(1) The case of The Brie Railroad Co. v. McCormick, 69 Ohio St., 45, does not apply to this state of facts;</p> <p>(2) It was for the jury to decide in the light of all the facts whether it was negligence on the part of the injured employe to sit upon the rail instead of taking a position more to the middle of the space between the tracks. Therefore it was error for the trial court, at the conclusion of the plaintiff’s evidence, to d