Case Name: Albert M. Lyon v. The Detroit, Lansing & Lake Michigan Railroad Company
Court: Michigan Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Michigan
Decision Date: 1875-04-13
Citations: 31 Mich. 429
Docket Number: 
Parties: Albert M. Lyon v. The Detroit, Lansing & Lake Michigan Railroad Company.
Judges: 
Reporter: Michigan Reports
Volume: 31
Pages: 429–430

Head Matter:
Albert M. Lyon v. The Detroit, Lansing & Lake Michigan Railroad Company.
Railroads: Engineer: Disregarding instructions: Injury: Contributory negligence. An engineer, who in running a railroad train is injured while he is disregarding the instructions which the railroad company had issued for his guidance, and is therein guilty of gross negligence contributory to the injury, cannot recover damages of the company.
Railroads: Engineer: Misplaced switch: Risks incident to the employment. Whether an accident occasioned by a switch being misplaced, whereby a train is run upon a side track and against cars standing there, is not within the risks assumed by an engineer in entering into the employment of the company to run its engines: — (¿ucere?
Submitted on briefs April 7.
Decided April 13.
Error to Superior Court of Detroit.
Chipman, Dewey & Hawes, for plaintiff in error.
G. V. N. Lothrop, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The plaintiff was employed as an engineer in running one of the passenger trains of the defendant in error, and on the evening of November 23d, 1871, and when a switch near the Grand Trunk Junction was misplaced, ran his train off upon a side track and against- cars which were standing there, and received an injury for which he brought suit against the company. Under the ruling of the court the jury returned a verdict against him.
The evidence conclusively showed, that in managing and running the train at the time, he disregarded the instructions which the company had issued for his guidance, and was therein guilty of gross negligence which directly conduced to the injury complained of. There is also much room for saying that his accident was within the risks he assumed by entering into the employment.
Upon the facts as shown by the record, the result was correct, and the judgment should be affirmed, with costs.