Show SUPREME 5 COURT COURTON ON CASE Opinion of Reversal Says Non NonSuit NonSuit NonSuit Suit Should Not Have u Been Entered DEFENSE CLAIM NEGLIGENCE Ju of Higher Tribunal Fu In oll Iho the KU Hal J I desiro III In I I i nis Whether or at not It ft child of ot S may ma be charged with negligence IB Is the tho question for tor the reversal bj by b bythe tho the supreme court of ot tho tiso case cuse of or Jesse the tho Oregon Short Line railway tho the plaintiff being the tho tho appel ant The Tho case Is ono one that IbM Is III son peculiar In personal Injury tiit I Is iii a IL Ind lad of or 8 0 or was at the tha time of ot the Injury complained of ot He lie WIts was near the tile station lIta at and anti ii l train Was ns between the tho boy and his home homelie homelie lie He was on his Ills way WilY and ho he asked tho the In charge chargo of ot the train trail how hOl long lone 1011 It would be bu before tho pulled out Tho The boy did lid not cant lInt to walk around tho train for tor It was Wll n II along long one otie The Tho n the boy hoy hoyIt It would be b 30 22 minutes before botoN the train moved 1110 Cd Thereupon n tho the boy to crawl beneath ono one of ot the thu cars and the tho traIn suddenly started up Injuring the boy bo PLEA ILEA OF E ETh Th Judgment sought soucht was masts for tor but the tho defendant set fiot up a 11 plea of negligence In lu Its Us defense anti a ii motion for tor dismissal or was granted The Tise boy appealed Than Tho supreme coun coult Is li of ot the opinion that he of ut the tho hoys boys negligence should have golan gono to the Jury Tho The opinion Is la written by b Justice Is concurred In by Chief Chalet Justice McCarty and Justice Justlee Frick |