Mitchell v. Illinois Cent. R.

Citations

• 110 La. 630
• 34 So. 714
• 1903 La. LEXIS 686

Syllabus

<p>RAILROADS — ACCIDENT AT CROSSING — RUNNING SWITCH — CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.</p> <p>1. Under the circumstances of this case, the-making of what is called a “running switch,” is-held gross negligence.</p> <p>2. While the running switch was the remote cause of the accident, a direct and approximate cause is found in the failure of the brakeman, who was sent to a public and much used street crossing over which the running switch had to-be made, to give the warning he was sent there to give.</p> <p>3. The two together suffice to fix the liability of the defendant, unless contributory negligence of a character to defeat recovering supervenes.</p> <p>4. While a boy of twelve years pf age may b.e guilty of contributory negligence which bars-recovery, he is not to be held to the same degree of care, prudence and circumspection that a full grown person is.</p> <p>5. A case like the present one, where a railroad company is engaged in the performance of a hazardous undertaking without using proper precautions to safe-guard the public, is to be differentiated from one where a person is injured by his failure to observe necessary precautions against the ordinary and usual dangers-to be anticipated at a railroad crossing.</p> <p>Breaux, J., dissenting.</p> <p>(Syllabus by'the Court.)</p>