Steele v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.

Citations

• 21 Wash. 287
• 57 P. 820
• 1899 Wash. LEXIS 279

Syllabus

<p>RAILROADS-NEGLIGENCE-SWITCHING CARS ACROSS PUBLIC STREET.</p> <p>It is negligence on the part of a railroad company to switch cars in a public and well traveled thoroughfare, unattended, except by a brakeman at the rear end of the cars, who could not see the track in front because of the obstruction afforded by the loaded cars.</p> <p>SAME — INJURY TO MINOR — CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE.</p> <p>An attempt of a fourteen year old boy to cross a railroad track at a street crossing at which his view was unobstructed is not, as a matter of law, such contributory negligence as will preclude a recovery for injuries sustained by being struck by detached cars approaching the crossing without warning or signal, while stepping back to avoid an engine approaching on another track, which was in front of the cars when first seen by him.</p> <p>CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE — WANT OE VIGILANCE-WHEN RESULT OE DEPENDANT’S NEGLIGENCE.</p> <p>One will not be allowed to impute a want of vigilance to another injured by his act, if that very want of vigilance was the consequence of an omission of duty on his own part.</p> <p>ACTION FOR PERSONAL INJURIES — CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE-MATTER OP DEFENSE.</p> <p>Contributory negligence being a matter of defense, it will be presumed that the plaintiff in an action for personal injuries was observing due care, until the presumption is overthrown by a preponderance of testimony on the defendant’s part.</p>