Senning v. Arkansas Valley Interurban Railway Co.

Citations

• 101 Kan. 78
• 165 P. 863
• 1917 Kan. LEXIS 22

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>Interurban Railway — Personal Injuries — Duty Owed to Licensee by Railway Company — Wanton Negligence. In an action against an -interurban electric railway company the plaintiff’s evidence tended to show these facts: He came-to the company’s station about dusk with friends who were leaving. . After they had boarded the car and before it started he went down into the space between it and the station platform to look for a coin his little daughter had dropped. The platform was about two feet above the ground and five feet from the track. Passengers were received and discharged by a gangplank laid to the rear steps. As the defendant was stooping over, facing away from the car, it started without any signal being given, and as the front wheels turned in the other direction on a curve the rear step protruded and struck him. Held,</p> <p>1. In the aspect most favorable to the plaintiff, he was but a licensee while in t^e place between the platform and the track, and the company owed him no duty to give him warning of the starting of the car.</p> <p>2. If such a duty had been owing to him the- omission to perform it would have constituted mere negligence and not wanton misconduct.</p> <p>3. In that case his own failure to use reasonable care for his safety would bar a recovery.</p>