Court Opinion

ID: 9826143
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 15:24:52.366312+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:41:52.524969
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Woods.

I concur in the result.

The fact that the step of a car has been made smooth and slick by use is no evidence that the step was defective. To hold that a railway company must see that its car steps are rough, not smooth, so that the foot of one getting on "a car while in motion will not slip, is carrying the law of negligence to a degree of refinement not sanctioned by reason or precedence.
There was evidence, however, that the conductor of the train ordered the plaintiff to board a moving car, and I think it was for the jury to say whether it was negligence on the part of the conductor to give the order, or contributory negligence on the part of the plaintiff to obey it.
On this ground, I concur in affirming the judgment.