Printable Format66-232. Action for damages by fire. In all actions against any railway company organized or doing business in this state, for damages by fire caused by the operating of said railroad, it shall be only necessary for the plaintiff in said action to establish the fact that said fire complained of was caused by the operating of said railroad, and the amount of his damages (which proof shall be prima facie evidence of negligence on the part of said railroad): Provided, That in estimating the damages under this act, the contributory negligence of the plaintiff shall be taken into consideration.
History: L. 1885, ch. 155, ยง 1; May 1; R.S. 1923, 66-232.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Measure of damages for burning and destruction of orchard. Mo. Pac. Rly. Co. v. Haynes, 1 K.A. 586, 42 P. 259; St. L. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Hoover, 3 K.A. 577, 43 P. 854; Barker v. Railway Co., 94 K. 61, 145 P. 829.
2. Effect of showing of contributory negligence; negligence not compared. Mo. Pac. Rly. Co. v. Haynes, 1 K.A. 586, 42 P. 259.
3. Instruction concerning presumption that defendant set out fire, held erroneous. Mo. Pac. Rly. Co. v. Haynes, 1 K.A. 586, 42 P. 259.
4. Instruction concerning negligence held not prejudicial to defendant. A. T. & S. F. Rld. Co. v. Huitt, 1 K.A. 781, 41 P. 1049.
5. Statute construed; negligence of plaintiff not contributory to injury. U. P. Rly. Co. v. Eddy, 2 K.A. 291, 42 P. 413.
6. Care and caution required of railway company. St. L. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Hoover, 3 K.A. 577, 43 P. 854.
7. Railway company not liable for unavoidable accidental escape of fire. St. L. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Hoover, 3 K.A. 577, 43 P. 854.
8. Negligence of parties a question for the jury. Padgett v. Railroad Co., 7 K.A. 736, 52 P. 578.
9. Burden of proof upon defendant to disprove negligence. Walker v. Kendall, 7 K.A. 801, 54 P. 113.
10. Rule of negligence changed by this act; distinction between cases. Railroad Co. v. Hays, 8 K.A. 545, 54 P. 322.
11. Direct evidence that fire escaped from engine unnecessary; circumstantial evidence. Railroad Co. v. Hutchinson, 8 K.A. 605, 56 P. 144; Railway Co. v. Ellithorp, 9 K.A. 503, 59 P. 286.
12. Fire escaping from sectionmen; burden of proof concerning negligence. Railway Co. v. Ellithorp, 9 K.A. 503, 59 P. 286.
13. Dry grass, etc., on right of way question of negligence for jury. White v. Mo. Pac. Rly. Co., 31 K. 280, 1 P. 611; St. L. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Richardson, 47 K. 517, 28 P. 183.
14. Allegations of negligence construed; defective engine. St. L. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Fudge, 39 K. 543, 18 P. 720.
15. Presumption applies to all cases where fire results; negligence. Mo. Pac. Rly. Co. v. Merrill, 40 K. 404, 19 P. 793.
16. Statute held valid. Mo. Pac. Rly. Co. v. Merrill, 40 K. 404, 19 P. 793.
17. Prima facie case made by evidence; burden of proof. A. T. & S. F. Rld. Co. v. Gibson, 42 K. 34, 21 P. 788.
18. "Burning off grass on right of way" is within "operation of railroad." Mo. Pac. Rly. Co. v. Cady, 44 K. 633, 24 P. 1088.
19. Burden of proof on railroad after prima facie case made. Ft. S. W. & W. Rld. Co. v. Karracker, 46 K. 511, 516, 26 P. 1027.
20. Prima facie case; contributory negligence not chargeable; facts shown. Ft. S. W. & W. Rly. Co. v. Tubbs, 47 K. 630, 28 P. 612.
21. Sufficiency of petition; facts to make prima facie case sufficient. St. L. & S. F. Rly. Co. v. Snavely, 47 K. 637, 28 P. 615.
22. Joinder of company and others; separate trial refused, not error. Latham v. Brown, 48 K. 190, 29 P. 400.
23. Evidence held sufficient to sustain finding; conflicting testimony. Ft. S. W. & W. Rly. Co. v. Fortney, 51 K. 287, 32 P. 904.
24. Evidence considered and held prima facie case made. C. R. I. & P. Rly. Co. v. McBride, 54 K. 172, 186, 37 P. 978.
25. Interest not recoverable on claim for damages from fire. A. T. & S. F. Rld. Co. v. Ayers, 56 K. 176, 183, 42 P. 722.
26. Direct evidence of origin of fire not indispensable; circumstantial evidence. Railroad Co. v. Matthews, 58 K. 447, 49 P. 602, (Affirmed: Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. Co. v. Matthews, 174 U.S. 96, 19 S.Ct. 609, 43 L.Ed. 909); Railroad Co. v. Perry, 65 K. 792, 70 P. 876.
27. Act held constitutional. Railroad Co. v. Matthews, 58 K. 447, 49 P. 602. Affirmed: Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe R. Co. v. Matthews, 174 U.S. 96, 19 S.Ct. 609, 43 L.Ed. 909.
28. Judgment on findings; when not rendered for defendant; negligence. Railroad Co. v. Chace, 64 K. 380, 67 P. 853.
29. Destruction of orchard and hedge; measure of damages; instructions. Railroad Co. v. Perry, 65 K. 792, 70 P. 876.
30. Pleading of negligence; proof must sustain allegations; sufficiency of petition. Railway Co. v. Garrison, 66 K. 625, 72 P. 225.
31. Evidence to overcome prima facie case; question for the jury. Railway Co. v. Geiser, 68 K. 281, 282, 75 P. 68; Manley v. Railway Co., 82 K. 211, 107 P. 540.
32. Two measures of damages; when both methods used. Railway Co. v. Geiser, 68 K. 281, 282, 75 P. 68.
33. Offer to burn fire guard no defense. U. P. Rld. Co. v. Holmes, 68 K. 810, 74 P. 606.
34. Leasing right of way does not excuse railroad for fires. Sprague v. Railway Co., 70 K. 359, 78 P. 828.
35. Instruction as to company's duty held erroneous. Railway Co. v. Sprague, 74 K. 574, 87 P. 733.
36. Company held liable for fire set out by independent contractor. Railroad Co. v. Madden, 77 K. 80, 85, 93 P. 586.
37. Market value of growing crops destroyed; cost of restoring hedge. Hilligoss v. Railway Co., 84 K. 372, 114 P. 383.
38. Jury need not specify particular element of negligence of defendant. Hilligoss v. Railway Co., 84 K. 372, 114 P. 383.
39. Damages for growing grass and for restoration of meadow allowable. Hayden v. Railway Co., 84 K. 376, 114 P. 384.
40. Evidence of other fires under similar circumstances admissible. Tuttle v. Railway Co., 86 K. 28, 119 P. 370.
41. Burden of proof concerning negligence of parties; instruction held erroneous. Tuttle v. Railway Co., 86 K. 28, 119 P. 370.
42. Party may demand answers to special questions, when; expert testimony. Saunders v. Railway Co., 86 K. 56, 119 P. 552.
43. Fire caused by defective engine; finding held within issues joined. McVeigh v. Railway Co., 87 K. 527, 124 P. 898.
44. Negligence restricted by petition; prima facie case; burden of proof. Murry v. Railway Co., 96 K. 740, 742, 153 P. 493.
45. Statutory presumption of negligence overcome by defendant's evidence. Tacha v. Railway Co., 97 K. 571, 574, 155 P. 922.
46. Proof fire caused by railroad prima facie evidence of negligence. Smith v. Railroad Co., 102 K. 150, 154, 169 P. 217; Rice v. Monroe, 108 K. 526, 530, 196 P. 756.
47. Fire from sparks from engine; issue of fact for jury. Otey v. Railroad Co., 108 K. 755, 758, 197 P. 203.
48. Where appeal involves sufficiency of evidence, complete transcript necessary. Barker v. Chicago, R. I. & P. Rly. Co., 158 K. 549, 550, 148 P.2d 493.
49. Discussed; justice court has jurisdiction to award attorney's fee as statutory penalty. Hinds v. Fine, 162 K. 328, 336, 176 P.2d 847.
50. Court may separate issue of liability from attorney's fees and determine fees without jury. Thomas v. Kansas City Southern Rly. Co., 197 K. 747, 748, 754, 755, 421 P.2d 51.
51. Construed as having been intended to cover damages to persons as well as property. Daily v. Missouri Pacific Railroad Company, 298 F.Supp. 911, 912, 913, 914, 915.
52. Common law fireman's rule precluded recovery by firefighter against railroads for negligence. Butler v. Union Pacific R. Co., 68 F.3d 378, 379 (1995).