Bonney v. Canadian National Railway Company

800 F.2d 274 (1986)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

A railroad spans the Androscoggin River between Lewiston and Auburn, Maine. The bridge is a concrete and steel structure, approximately 410 feet long, with tracks about 50 feet above the surface of the river. The tracks sit on railroad ties which are spaced several inches apart and which extend about three feet on either side of the tracks. There is nothing on the sides of the ties to prevent a pedestrian from falling off the bridge into the river below. Residents in the area frequently use the railroad trestle as a shortcut between Lewiston and Auburn. D had been aware of this practice for decades. D placed 'No Trespassing' signs on the bridge. The signs were often removed by vandals, and none was posted the day of the accident. Fifteen-year-old Jonathan attempted to return from Auburn to his home in Lewiston via the railroad bridge. The area was dark and unlit. Jonathan told his companion, Sheink, that he was going to ride his bicycle across the bridge with the tires outside the rails. Sheink warned him that he would die if he attempted such a ride. Jonathan rode and soon Sheink heard the cries for help from the river below. Sheink ran to a nearby store for help. Officer Bonney, swam out to attempt a rescue. Another officer, realizing that Officer Bonney and Jonathan were in distress, swam out to assist them. Bonney pushed the boy toward the second officer who tried, unsuccessfully, to bring Jonathan back to shore. Both Jonathan and Officer Bonney drowned. P brought this action against D seeking damages for the death of her husband, Officer Bonney. P argued that violated its duty to trespassers to refrain from willful, wanton, or reckless conduct and that this breach of duty caused the accident that invited Bonney's rescue attempt. The court determined that Jonathan was a trespasser. It held D liable for Bonney's death, reasoning that D had violated its duty to refrain from willful, wanton acts. Judgment was entered in the amount of $689,422. D appealed.