Jacob Marion v. Grand Trunk Western Railroad Company

Summary

The Court held that a train operator may presume that a person on the tracks will move to safety, but that presumption ends when it becomes apparent the person will not or cannot do so. Because reasonable jurors could find that the defendants should have taken braking or other avoidance measures sooner, and could dispute whether the train could have been stopped in time, summary disposition was improper. The Court also held that the adoption of comparative negligence did not invalidate earlier precedent defining the railroad operator’s duty. Justice Viviano, concurring in part, would have framed the factual questions more specifically around when the danger became apparent and whether avoidance was still possible.