Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

Great Northern Railway Company v. Donaldson, Administratrix Of Thoms

• 1917 • 246 U.S. 121 • White Court
In the case of Great Northern Railway Company v. Donaldson, Administratrix of Thoms (1917), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company. The case arose from an accident where a train owned by Great Northern Railway hit and killed Mr. Thoms while he was driving his car across a railroad crossing at night without any lights on his vehicle. His widow sued for damages, claiming negligence on part of the railway company as there were no warning signals or guards at that particular...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief White Court
Term: 1917
Docket: 172
246 U.S. 121
38 S. Ct. 230
62 L. Ed. 616
1918 U.S. LEXIS 1527
Argued: Jan 31, 1918

Great Northern Railway Company v. Donaldson, Administratrix Of Thoms

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of Great Northern Railway Company v. Donaldson, Administratrix of Thoms (1917), the U.S Supreme Court ruled in favor of the railway company. The case arose from an accident where a train owned by Great Northern Railway hit and killed Mr. Thoms while he was driving his car across a railroad crossing at night without any lights on his vehicle. His widow sued for damages, claiming negligence on part of the railway company as there were no warning signals or guards at that particular crossing to alert drivers about incoming trains. However, upon review, it was found that despite having knowledge about this unguarded crossing and its potential dangers, Mr.Thoms had chosen to cross it under unsafe conditions i.e., during nighttime with no lights on his vehicle which made him practically invisible to approaching trains until too close for them to stop in time. The court held that although railroads have a duty towards public safety including providing adequate warnings at crossings wherever necessary; individuals also bear responsibility for their own safety especially when they are aware of existing hazards yet choose not to take appropriate precautions against them.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for the Great Northern Railway Company v. Donaldson case, Justice Holmes disagreed with the majority's decision to hold the railway company liable for Thoms' death. He argued that there was insufficient evidence to prove negligence on part of the railway company and that it was not clear whether Thoms had been killed by a train or died from other causes. Furthermore, he contended that even if Thoms had been killed by a train, it could have happened in any number of ways which did not involve negligence on behalf of anyone associated with running trains over this crossing at night without lights or watchmen. Therefore, according to him, liability should not be imposed upon mere speculation and conjecture about what might have occurred.

Opinion written by Justice WRDay
Decided: Mar 04, 1918
PDF viewer is not available.
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms