Pokora vs. Wabash Ry. Co.

,
292 U.S. Sup. Ct. 580

Facts:

Pokora (P) approached a Wabash (D) railroad crossing in his truck. Pokora stopped and looked and
listened as well as he could. P heard no bell or whistle and drove slowly ahead and was struck by a
passenger train. P sued Wabash for his injuries and the trial court granted a directed verdict in favor of D
on the grounds that P was contributorily negligent as a matter of law. The ruling was affirmed by the court
of appeals and D appealed to the United States Supreme Court.

Issues:
1) What is the duty imposed on a party when crossing a railroad track?
2) What criteria must courts of law use in establishing a standard of prudent conduct as a rule of law?

Holding and Rule:

1) There is a duty before crossing a railroad track to stop, look, listen, and to get out of the vehicle and
reconnoiter if the view is obstructed and one cannot otherwise be sure that a train is not dangerously near
provided that sight and hearing become inadequate for a travelers protection.
2) A standard of prudent conduct declared by courts as a rule of law must be taken over from the facts of
life, and must be such that a failure to conform to it is negligence so obvious and certain that rational and
candid minds could not deem it otherwise.
The circumstances of the situation dictate the duty that is due and the duty to stop and look is predicated
on circumstances where sight and sound alone make it dangerous to a reasonable person. It is up to the
jury to decide whether a particular course of action was prudent under the circumstances.
Disposition: Reversed and remanded.

Notes: The standard for measuring negligence is conduct that falls below the standard established by law
for the protection of others against an unreasonable risk of harm. That standard must be determined by
the fact finder on a case by case basis. The negligence standard never changes; it is only the
circumstances that change and how a reasonable person acts under them.