 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Taylor v. Mississippian Railway9/19/2002
udgment was appropriate in the case sub judice. The evidence clearly supports a finding that Gable was a trespasser. Taylor's evidence does not reveal that the Mississippian was aware that ATV riders were using the railroad near the Ironwood Bluff subdivision. Because this Court finds that Gable was a trespasser, there is no further need to address Taylor's contention that Gable was a licensee.
II. DID THE TRIAL COURT ERR IN FAILING TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE MISSISSIPPIAN WAS AWARE OF ATV USE ON ITS TRACKS, AND THAT, AS SUCH, THE ATV RIDERS WERE LICENSEES AND THE MISSISSIPPIAN HAD A DUTY TO WARN THE ATV RIDERS OF OBSTRUCTIONS.
. This issue was discussed along with Issue I. This Court finds that the trial court did not err in its ruling that the Mississippian was unaware that ATV riders were riding down the inside of the railroad tracks for public passage near the Ironwood Bluff subdivision. Therefore, Gable was appropriately labeled a trespasser.
CONCLUSION
. Based on the foregoing reasons, this Court affirms the trial court's order granting summary judgment to the Mississippian.
. AFFIRMED.
PITTMAN, C.J., McRAE AND SMITH, P.JJ., WALLER, COBB, EASLEY, CARLSON AND GRAVES, JJ., CONCUR.
|