Howard v. Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Ry. Co.
Howard v. Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Ry. Co.
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The engineer and fireman were both engaged at their duties on the engine, and neither saw the animal on the track. While a look-out should be kept when running, it is not want of proper care for the servants of the company to give needed attention to their primary duty, which is the operation of the engine; and the fact that, for a short time, neither the engineer nor fireman was looking out for animals on the track did not make the company liable for the death of the animal killed. Upon the undisputed facts, the judgment of the law is that the loss of the mare should fall on her owner rather than upon the railroad company, and, as there was nothing to be found .by a jury, the court rightly instructed for the defendant.
Affirmed.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- W. E. Howard v. Louisville, New Orleans & Texas Ry. Co.
- Cited By
- 3 cases
- Status
- Published
- Syllabus
- Railroads. Negligence. Duty of engineer and fireman. While a look-out should be kept from the locomotive of a running train, the primary duty of the engineer and fireman on the engine is to properly operate it. If, while the fireman is stoking the engine, the attention of the engineer is engaged in repairing a necessary part of the machinery that has become deranged, so that during a short time no look-out is kept, and an animal is killed on the track without being seen, this is not want of proper care, and the company is not liable for the death of the animal.