R. & D. R. R. v. Risdon's Adm'r
Citations
- 87 Va. 335
- 12 S.E. 786
- 1891 Va. LEXIS 76
Syllabus
<p>Raileoad Company and Employee—Duties —Defective appliances—Contributory negligence— Case at bar.—Employee accepts employment subject to incidental perils, and must obey orders. Employer does not insure employee’s safety, yet must be .careful to provide and maintain safe machinery, &c.; but it is not required to exchange it for every supposed improvement. The “ frog ” in this case was dangerous, and could have been made safe by blocking. Yet it was a standard frog, the same used everywhere by the defendant company. The plaintiff’s intestate had been for some time employed in same yard, over same frog, and was familiar with its character. On night of accident, yardmaster ordered him to uncouple cars, which were standing still, and then ride them back on a switch, but, instead of obeying orders,.he signalled engineer to back, and stepping between the moving cars to . uncouple them, got his foot caught fast in the frog, and was run over and killed: held, employee’s disobedience of orders was contributory negligence, and the proximate cause of the injury, and his administrator cannot recover.</p>
Judges: Lacy, Lewis
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.