History
  • No items yet
midpage
Railway Co. v. Mayes
58 Ark. 397
Ark.
1894
Check Treatment
Wood J.,

(after stating the facts). It is not negligence “per se ” to jump from a moving train. But where one, compos mentis, under no circumstances of emergency or constraint, takes “a leap in the dark” from a train moving at the rate shown in this case, his conduct is reckless and foolhardy. St. Louis, etc., R. Co. v. Rosenberry, 45 Ark. 256 ; Catlett v. Railway Company, 57 Ark. 461.

The learned circuit judge, upon appellee’s own statement and the undisputed facts, might very properly have directed a verdict for appellant.

Reversed and dismissed.

Case Details

Case Name: Railway Co. v. Mayes
Court Name: Supreme Court of Arkansas
Date Published: Jan 27, 1894
Citation: 58 Ark. 397
Court Abbreviation: Ark.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.