Plaintiff alleged that while he was carefully crossing defendant's right of way, on a clearly defined and well worn footpath, he was struck by defendant's engine, which was backing toward the footpath in a "stealthy manner"; that defendant's servants failed to give warning as they were accustomed to do, or keep a lookout; that the footpath had been habitually used in crossing defendant's right of way for many years, that such crossing had been constant, open, and notorious as defendant knew; and that defendant had never objected to this use. Defendant demurred. Held, demurrer sustained on the ground that defendant was under no duty to keep a careful lookout for a bare licensee using its right of way. The court further stated that the only duties owed to a bare licensee were not to create a trap, not to inflict wilful or wanton injury, and after his presence was discovered to take reasonable care to prevent injury to him. Jackson v. Pennsylvania R. R., (Md. 1939) 3 A. (2d) 719.
Michigan Law Review,
NEGLIGENCE - DUTY TO DISCOVER CONTINUOUS TRESPASSER OR BARE LICENSEE ON RAILROAD'S RIGHT OF WAY,
Mich. L. Rev.
Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol37/iss7/22