Court Opinion

ID: 9458079
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 20:42:25.413319+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:35:37.876435
License: Public Domain

McLAUGHLIN, Circuit Judge
(dissenting) .
As I see it, the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury that the defendant railroad could be found guilty of wilful and wanton misconduct by its failure to place a erossbuck sign or other similar warning device between the two sets of tracks, thus alerting northbound traffic of the situation it was approaching. If such conduct were found by the jury it would remove the bar of contributory negligence from the plaintiff-appellant.
It was shown that there had been two accidents at this crossing within the last ten years and that appellee knew of them. The townline track was rarely if ever used in the two years preceding the accident. However, crossbuck signs which had previously been placed before the mainline track as a warning to northbound traffic had been removed and the present sign installed in front of the townline track. The latter sign advises motorists of two sets of track but the construction of the road is such that the mainline tracks are not visible until a person is almost on top of them — eight *1217to twelve feet away. If one were to cross the townline tracks and become aware of a train coming on the mainline track, not being able to see that track there was no indication as to where he could safely stop. Under all the facts presented in this appeal the issue of wilful and wanton misconduct was a question for the jury. I would reverse the trial court judgment and remand the case for a new trial on the merits.