Book Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1920 edition. Excerpt: ...care for his own safety required a person on the station premises of a railroad to use reasonable diligence and caution to protect himself from all dangers arising from the operation of passing trains in a prudent and proper manner, and in such other manner as may have been, or could have been, known to him by the exercise of ordinary care under the circumstances, but he was not required to use such unusual and extraordinary care as would be necessary for his protection from dangers arising from the reckless or negligent operation of passing trains of which he had no knowledge, either actual or constructive, in time to escape. p. 418. ' Presumptlon as to Specd.--One rightfully on the station premises of a railroad has a right to assume, in the absence of knowledge or warning to the contrary, that trains will not be operated at an excessive speed, and without due signals, or in any other negligent manner. p. 419. Gonfiicting Evidonce.--Jury Qucstion.--Where one was killed on a railroad's station premises by one train passing another tmin which was receiving and discharging passengers, and the evidence, in an action for the death, was conflicting as to the care used in operating the train striking decedent. both as to its speed and where and when warning signals, if any, were given, and the jury might have found, on weighing the evidence, that decedent was rightfully on the track, and used reasonable care for his own safety as against all known danger, or dang'er which he might reasonably have anticipated or known by the exercise of due care, but notwithstanding such care he was killed because of the negligent manner in which the train was operated under the existing circumstances, the question of decedent's contributory...