Witmer v. Bessemer & Lake Erie R. R.

Citations

• 241 Pa. 112
• 88 A. 314
• 1913 Pa. LEXIS 742

Syllabus

<p>Negligence — Contributory negligence — Automobile—Grade crossing — Damages for delay — Substantial error.</p> <p>1. There is no imperative duty requiring the driver of a motor car to stop on the tracks of a railroad company, after being committed to the crossing, because there might be more danger in stopping than in going ahead. It is his duty to use due care and to proceed cautiously, even after being committed to the crossing, but there is no imperative duty either to stop or to go ahead.</p> <p>2. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries occasioned by a collision at a grade crossing of defendant’s train with an automobile, in which plaintiff was riding, it appeared that the automobile was stopped at a proper place before attempting the crossing, that plaintiff and the driver of the car who was under plaintiff’s direction looked and listened, and an approaching train was not then in view, that the automobile then started across the tracks, of which there were two at that point, and was struck. Held, the question of the contributory negligence of the driver of the car was for the jury.</p> <p>3. In the trial of a negligence case to recover damages for personal injuries, it is error for the court to instruct the jury that in the assessment of damages they may allow a sum not exceeding six per centum per annum for delay in payment. Where, however, the court, conceding its error on a rule for a new trial, reduced the judgment to an amount thought to be sufficient to correct the error, the judgment will be affirmed, where no assignment of error correctly raises the question.</p>