Case ID: pa_213/html/0320-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Spangler, Appellant, v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company.
    
      Negligence — Railroads—Master and servant — Fellow servant.
    
    In an action against a railroad company to recover damages for the death of plaintiff’s husband, an employee of the company, a nonsuit is properly entered, where it appears that the decedent was killed in a collision while riding on an engine of the company, and that the accident was caused by the negligence of fellow servants in violating the rules and schedules of the company.
    Argued Oct. 24, 1905.
    Appeal, No. 29, Oct. T., 1905, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Allegheny Co., Sept. T., 1902, No. 88, refusing to take off nonsuit in case of M. E. Spangler v. The Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company.
    Before Mitchell, C. J., Fell, Brown, Mestrezat, Potter, Elkin and Stewart, JJ.
    Affirmed.
    Trespass to recover damages for personal injuries.
    Brown, J., filed the following opinion:
    This matter arises upon a motion to take off a compulsory nonsuit in an action by Mary E. Spangler against the 'Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, to recover damages resulting from the death of her husband, caused by a head-on collision between an east-bound freight engine and a west-bound passenger train. Mr. Spangler was upon the east-bound freight engine operated by the freight crew proceeding to the scene of a wreck upon the Wheeling branch of said company.
    The undisputed evidence shows :
    1. That the telegraphic message (under which the freight engine was proceeding) was subject (a) to the rule and railway schedule of the company giving priority of right of way to passenger trains; and (6) to the rule requiring a flagman approximately a mile ahead of the freight engine to protect its crew against passenger trains.
    2. That in violation of these rules and schedules well known to the employees of the railroad company (of whom Mr. Spangler was one), the freight engine, without any flagman ahead, proceeded easterly several miles to the point of its collision with the west-bound passenger train.
    The violation of these rules by fellow servants being the proximate cause of the collisions bars a recovery. The case is ruled by Kennelty v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad Company, 166 Pa. 60, in which it is said by Mr. Justice Fell, delivering the opinion:
    “ It was clearly shown by the testimony produced by the plaintiff that the collision was caused not by an unsafe schedule or defective rules, but that it was due to the reckless disregard of clearly defined and well understood duties by those in charge of the train. As they were coemployees of the plaintiff’s husband there was nothing to leave to the jury, and the nonsuit was properly entered.”
    Motion overruled.
    
      Errar assigned was refusal to take off nonsuit.
    
      
      Joseph Rowley, with him W. A. Hudson, for appellant.
    
      John S. Wendt, with him Johns Me Cleave, for appellee.
    January 2, 1906:
   Per Curiam,

Judgment affirmed on the opinion of the court below.