40 S.W.2d 1003 | Ky. Ct. App. | 1931
Affirming.
In this action by George D. Wright against the Louisville Nashville Railroad Company and the city of Franklin, the trial court, at the conclusion of the evidence for plaintiff, directed a verdict in favor of the defendants. Plaintiff appeals.
The facts are these: Cedar street in the city of Franklin runs east and west, and crosses the Louisville Nashville Railroad right of way practically at right angles. The property north of Cedar street and on the west side of the right of way is owned by the railroad. Next to the right of way is the passenger depot, which extends to Cedar street. West of the passenger depot is a small park, which abuts on Cedar street. Between the depot and the park is a driveway leading from Depot street on the north, and intersecting with Cedar street on the south. At the intersection and on the north side of Cedar street is a sidewalk or crossing composed of stone slabs from one and one-half to two feet wide, and stretching from the park on the west to the depot platform, a distance of about 30 feet. On the morning of November 17, 1926, appellant, who was riding horseback, went to a blacksmith's shop on Depot street. Later he rode up Depot street and turned south over the driveway leading into Cedar street. On reaching the crossing his horse's foot slipped on one of the slabs and appellant was thrown on the concrete platform and severely injured. According to appellant and other witnesses the slabs were very slick and very slanting, one of the witnesses saying that, according to his remembrance, the slant from east to west was something near 15 inches in a distance of about 30 feet. There was further evidence that the driveway from Depot street to Cedar street was maintained by the railroad company, but no evidence that it constructed or maintained the crossing or sidewalk on the north side of Cedar street. There was also evidence to the effect that the driveway or street on the railroad property was used generally by the traveling public, and that the crossing or sidewalk was maintained by the city.
(1) It does not satisfactorily appear that the railroad owns the ground on which the crossing is located, or that it ever undertook the duty of maintaining the crossing. On the contrary it appears that the crossing is a part of Cedar street, and was maintained by the city. In *75 the circumstances the railroad is a mere abutting property owner, and there being no evidence that the alleged defective condition was due to any act of negligence on its part, it is not responsible for injuries growing out of such defect. Webster v. Chesapeake O. R. Co., 105 S.W. 945, 32 Ky. Law Rep. 404. It follows that the peremptory instruction to find for the railroad company was proper.
(2) In Webster v. City of Vanceburg,
Judgment affirmed.