No. 14718
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA
1979
WILLIAM 0 PENN,
.
Plaintiff and Appellant,
BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC.,
a corporation, and The State
of Montana,
Defendants and Respondents.
Appeal from: District Court of the Sixteenth Judicial District,
Honorable A. B. Martin, Judge presiding.
Counsel of Record:
For Appellant:
Allen Beck argued, Billings, Montana
For Respondent:
Kurt W. Kroschel argued, Billings, Montana
P. Keith Keller argued, Helena, Montana
Submitted: December 11, 1979
&+$A. . ;>
Filed:
Clerk
Mr. J u s t i c e J o h n Conway H a r r i s o n d e l i v e r e d t h e O p i n i o n o f
t h e Court.
A p p e l l a n t Penn b r o u g h t a c a u s e i n t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t ,
S i x t e e n t h J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t , Rosebud County, t o r e c o v e r
damages f o r i n j u r i e s s u f f e r e d i n a n a u t o m o b i l e - t r a i n accident.
Penn a p p e a l s from a j u r y v e r d i c t i n f a v o r o f r e s p o n d e n t s ,
B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n , I n c . and t h e S t a t e o f Montana.
W e n o t e t h a t t h i s c a u s e a r o s e b e f o r e t h e Montana com-
p a r a t i v e n e g l i g e n c e s t a t u t e , s e c t i o n 27-1-702, MCA, took
effect. C o n s e q u e n t l y , a n y c o n t r i b u t o r y n e g l i g e n c e by Penn
t h a t p r o x i m a t e l y c a u s e d h i s i n j u r i e s would b a r h i s r e c o v e r y
o f damages from t h e S t a t e and B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n . Dunham
v . S o u t h s i d e N a t i o n a l Bank ( 1 9 7 6 ) , 169 Mont. 466, 548 P.2d
1383; DeVerniero v. Eby ( 1 9 7 2 ) , 159 Mont. 1 4 6 , 496 P.2d 290.
I n J u n e 1975, Penn was working a s a p i p e f i t t e r i n Col-
s t r i p , Montana. On J u n e 11, 1975, Penn d e c i d e d t o d r i v e t o
M i l e s C i t y , Montana a f t e r work t o p u r c h a s e new t i r e s f o r h i s
1 9 7 5 F o r d van. J e r r y Dewey and M a r t i n K u s s l e r , f r i e n d s o f
a p p e l l a n t , went a l o n g f o r t h e r i d e . The t r i p t o Miles C i t y
was u n e v e n t f u l . A f t e r t h e new t i r e s w e r e p u t o n ~ e n n ' sv a n ,
t h e t h r e e men p u r c h a s e d a s i x pack o f b e e r f o r t h e r o a d and
s e t o u t on t h e r e t u r n t r i p t o C o l s t r i p . A t approximately
8:30 p.m., t h e t h r e e men s t o p p e d f o r d i n n e r a t t h e Gausthauf
Bar i n F o r s y t h , Montana. A f t e r d i n n e r o f b e e r and p i z z a ,
Dewey a n d K u s s l e r began p l a y i n g p o o l and Penn went t o a
f r i e n d ' s home t o s l e e p . A p p r o x i m a t e l y o n e h o u r l a t e r , Penn
was awakened by f r i e n d s who s u g g e s t e d t h a t he r e t u r n t o t h e
G a u s t h a u f t o j o i n Dewey and K u s s l e r . Penn r e t u r n e d t o t h e
Gausthauf.
A t a n undetermined t i m e , Penn l e f t t h e Gausthauf t o
s l e e p i n h i s van. Dewey and K u s s l e r remained i n t h e Gaust-
hauf d r i n k i n g b e e r and p l a y i n g p o o l . L a t e r , Kussler joined
Penn i n t h e van. A t a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1 : 3 0 a.m., Dewey r e t u r n e d
t o t h e van. Dewey began d r i v i n g back t o C o l s t r i p w i t h Penn
a n d K u s s l e r a s l e e p i n t h e back o f t h e v a n .
Dewey t e s t i f i e d t h a t a s a m a t t e r o f h a b i t he would a s k
t h e owner i f h e c o u l d d r i v e t h e o w n e r ' s c a r and t h a t he
t h o u g h t t h a t h e had a s k e d Penn on t h e n i g h t i n q u e s t i o n .
Penn h a s n o r e c o l l e c t i o n o f a n y e v e n t s from t h e t i m e he
a r r i v e d a t t h e Gausthauf u n t i l he awoke i n t h e h o s p i t a l
s e v e r a l days a f t e r t h e accident.
The a c c i d e n t o c c u r r e d s o u t h o f F o r s y t h on Highway 315
a t t h e K o s e l k a c r o s s i n g , where t h e r a i l r o a d t r a c k p a r a l l e l s
t h e road before crossing it a t a sharp angle. The c r o s s i n g
i t s e l f i s l o c a t e d a t a c r e e k bottom and i s v i s i b l e from t h e
c r e s t o f a h i l l 879 f e e t n o r t h o f t h e c r o s s i n g . There i s a
d r o p o f a b o u t 2 5 f e e t i n a l t i t u d e from t h e c r e s t o f t h e h i l l
t o the crossing.
A r e f l e c t o r i z e d warning s i g n i s l o c a t e d 796 f e e t from
t h e c r o s s i n g , and t h e r e a r e r e f l e c t o r i z e d c r o s s b u c k s a t t h e
crossing i t s e l f . Both w a r n i n g d e v i c e s a r e v i s i b l e from t h e
crest of t h e h i l l . A d d i t i o n a l l y , seven r e f l e c t o r i z e d p a n e l s
a n d t h e r e f l e c t o r i z e d l o g o o f t h e r a i l r o a d company a r e
l o c a t e d on t h e s i d e of each c o a l c a r .
A t the t i m e of the accident, the train was traveling
a p p r o x i m a t e l y 27 m i l e s p e r h o u r , and t h e van was g o i n g 50
m i l e s p e r hour. A v e h i c l e t r a v e l i n g 50 m i l e s p e r h o u r from
t h e c r e s t o f t h e h i l l would r e a c h t h e c r o s s i n g i n a b o u t 1 2
seconds. F i f t y seconds p r i o r t o t h e a c c i d e n t , t h e f r o n t of
t h e l o c o m o t i v e was 1 , 8 5 0 f e e t from t h e van. The l o c o m o t i v e
was e q u i p p e d w i t h a 200,000 candlepower l i g h t v i s i b l e a t
t h a t d i s t a n c e , and t h e r e was n o impediments t o i t s v i s i b i l i t y .
The l i g h t was aimed a t t h e van u n t i l 34 s e c o n d s p r i o r t o t h e
a c c i d e n t , when t h e l o c o m o t i v e and van p a s s e d e a c h o t h e r .
The van s t r u c k t h e t h i r t y - f i f t h c a r from t h e B u r l i n g t o n
Northern c o a l t r a i n caboose. T h e r e w e r e no s k i d marks o r
o t h e r i n d i c a t i o n s of evasive a c t i o n . Most o f t h e van was i n
t h e l e f t l a n e of t r a f f i c a t t h e t i m e of impact.
The i n v e s t i g a t i n g highway p a t r o l m a n found s e v e n t e e n empty
b e e r c a n s a n d o n e empty b o t t l e i n and a r o u n d t h e van.
Dewey, t h e d r i v e r , c o n s e n t e d t o a b l o o d sample a few h o u r s
a f t e r the accident. I t revealed a blood-alcohol l e v e l of
. 1 6 % . An e x p e r t w i t n e s s e s t i m a t e d Dewey's b l o o d - a l c o h o l
l e v e l a t t h e t i m e o f t h e a c c i d e n t t o b e .20 t o .21%. The
p r e s u m p t i v e l e v e l o f i n t o x i c a t i o n i n Montana i s .lo%.
S e c t i o n 61-8-401 ( 3 ) ( c ), MCA.
A s a r e s u l t o f t h e a c c i d e n t , Penn l o s t h i s g a l l b l a d d e r ,
i s p a r a l i z e d below t h e w a i s t , and s u f f e r s n e u r o l o g i c a l
p r o b l e m s . Dewey r e c e i v e d a broken h i p , a c o l l a p s e d l u n g and
a s e v e r e s c a l p wound. K u s s l e r was k i l l e d .
Penn r a i s e s n i n e a s s i g n m e n t s o f e r r o r f o r r e v i e w . We
h o l d i n f a v o r o f r e s p o n d e n t s on a l l t h e a s s i g n m e n t s o f
error.
I n h i s f i r s t a s s i g n m e n t o f e r r o r , Penn c o n t e n d s t h a t
t h e D i s t r i c t Court e r r e d i n permitting t h e respondents t o
p r o c e e d on a t h e o r y o f n e g l i g e n t e n t r u s t m e n t . Penn a s s e r t s
t h a t i n Montana n e g l i g e n t e n t r u s t m e n t may o n l y b e u s e d a s a
theory of recovery, n o t a s a defense s i n c e it involves an
a p p l i c a t i o n o f imputed c o n t r i b u t o r y n e g l i g e n c e . Such a
contention i s without m e r i t . H e r e , respondents pleaded
n e g l i g e n t e n t r u s t m e n t as a t y p e of c o n t r i b u t o r y negligence,
imputed t o Penn a s t h e e n t r u s t o r , n o t t o t h e e n t r u s t e e ,
Dewey. Respondents w e r e n o t t r y i n g t o impute t h e n e g l i g e n t
a c t s o f t h e d r i v e r t o Penn, t h e p a s s e n g e r and owner of t h e
van.
The R e s t a t e m e n t (Second) o f T o r t s s u p p o r t s n e g l i g e n t
e n t r u s t m e n t a s a d e f e n s e when u s e d a s a s p e c i e s of c o n t r i -
butory negligence. The R e s t a t e m e n t p r o v i d e s t h a t a n a c t o r
i s n e g l i g e n t i f he a l l o w s a t h i r d p a r t y t o u s e an o b j e c t
u n d e r t h e a c t o r ' s c o n t r o l when t h e a c t o r knows, o r h a s
r e a s o n t o know, o f a n u n r e a s o n a b l e r i s k of harm t o o t h e r s .
R e s t a t e m e n t (Second) o f T o r t s SS308, 390 ( 1 9 6 5 ) .
The s e c o n d a s s i g n m e n t o f e r r o r Penn a s s e r t s i s t h a t t h e
D i s t r i c t C o u r t I n s t r u c t i o n No. 25 f a i l e d t o c h a r g e t h e j u r y
p r o p e r l y on t h e e l e m e n t s o f n e g l i g e n t e n t r u s t m e n t . Penn,
however, f a i l e d t o o b j e c t t o t h e i n s t r u c t i o n a t t r i a l . The
contention t h a t an i n s t r u c t i o n does n o t s t a t e t h e l a w cannot
be considered absent a proper o b j e c t i o n a t t r i a l . Roberts
R e a l t y Corp. v . C i t y o f G r e a t F a l l s ( 1 9 7 2 ) , 160 Mont. 1 4 4 ,
500 P.2d 956.
The t h i r d a s s i g n m e n t o f e r r o r a s s e r t e d i s t h e D i s t r i c t
C o u r t ' s f a i l u r e t o a d m i t a p e t i t i o n o f t h e Rosebud County
Commissioners and o t h e r documents c o n c e r n i n g t h e w a r n i n g
d e v i s e s a t t h e Koselka c r o s s i n g . Penn m a i n t a i n s t h e a b s e n c e
o f t h e s e e v i d e n t i a r y documents p r e c l u d e d him from e s t a b l i s h -
i n g n o t i c e a s a n e l e m e n t o f n e g l i g e n c e and t h e n e c e s s a r y
s t a t e o f mind f o r a n award o f p u n i t i v e damages.
P r i o r t o t r i a l , b o t h p a r t i e s moved - l i m i n e t o e x c l u d e
in
c e r t a i n documents i n c l u d i n g t h o s e a t i s s u e now. A t the
h e a r i n g on t h e s e m o t i o n s , Penn a g r e e d t h e documentary e v i d e n c e
was u n n e c e s s a r y i f t h e S t a t e and B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n would
admit t o t h e d a t e they received n o t i c e of t h e dangerous
n a t u r e of t h e crossing. A l t h o u g h Penn s t a t e d t h a t he wished
t o preserve h i s p o s i t i o n regarding t h e a d m i s s i b i l i t y of t h e
documents, a l l p a r t i e s e n t e r e d i n t o a s t i p u l a t i o n r e g a r d i n g
t h e d a t e o f n o t i c e . The s t i p u l a t i o n was b e f o r e t h e j u r y , and
Penn f a i l e d t o o f f e r t h e p e t i t i o n o r o t h e r r e l e v a n t documents
i n t o e v i d e n c e o r make a n y o f f e r o f p r o o f a t t r i a l .
The s t i p u l a t i o n e n t e r e d i n t o by Penn f o r e c l o s e s a
review of t h i s i s s u e . I t i s improper t o r a i s e a n i s s u e upon
a p p e a l a s t o a q u e s t i o n o f law o r f a c t a f t e r t h e p a r t i e s
h a v e e n t e r e d i n t o a s t i p u l a t i o n as t o t h a t law o r f a c t .
Oregon Automobile I n s u r a n c e Company v . Watkins ( 1 9 7 3 ) , 264
Or. 464, 506 P.2d 1 7 9 .
The f o u r t h a s s i g n m e n t o f e r r o r i s t h a t t h e ~ i s t r i c t
C o u r t e r r e d i n p e r m i t t i n g d e f e n s e w i t n e s s Van Schwartz- t o
t e s t i f y a t t r i a l c o n c e r n i n g h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s from a n e x p e r -
iment. Penn c o n t e n d s Van S c h w a r t z l a c k e d t h e n e c e s s a r y
q u a l i f i c a t i o n s t o t e s t i f y a s a n e x p e r t w i t n e s s and t h e
e x p e r i m e n t w a s c o n d u c t e d u n d e r d i f f e r e n t c o n d i t i o n s from
those e x i s t i n g a t t h e t i m e of t h e accident.
Penn c a n n o t a s s e r t Van S c h w a r t z ' s l a c k o f q u a l i f i c a t i o n s
a s a ground f o r r e v e r s a l s i n c e h i s o b j e c t i o n on t h i s ground
was n o t t i m e l y . A t t r i a l , Penn o b j e c t e d t o t e s t i m o n y con-
c e r n i n g Van S c h w a r t z ' s o b s e r v a t i o n s l o n g b e f o r e any s u c h
t e s t i m o n y was g i v e n . H e made no o b j e c t i o n o n c e Van S c h w a r t z
began t o t e s t i f y a b o u t h i s o b s e r v a t i o n s . Sikorski v. Olin
(1977) , Mont. , 568 P.2d 571, 34 St.Rep. 1042. Sim-
i l a r l y , Penn c a n n o t c o m p l a i n upon a p p e a l t h a t t h e e x p e r i m e n t
was c o n d u c t e d u n d e r c o n d i t i o n s d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e on t h e
n i g h t o f t h e a c c i d e n t s i n c e d i f f e r i n g c o n d i t i o n s was n o t a
ground f o r h i s o b j e c t i o n a t t r i a l . Hayes v . J.M.S. Const.
(1978) - Mont. , 579 P.2d 1225, 35 St.Rep. 722.
I n h i s f i f t h and s i x t h a s s i g n m e n t s o f e r r o r , Penn
a s s e r t s i t was e r r o r f o r t h e D i s t r i c t C o u r t t o r e f u s e t o
g i v e p l a i n t i f f ' s I n s t r u c t i o n Nos. 24 and 31, which would
h a v e c h a r g e d t h e j u r y t h a t t h e S t a t e and B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n
w e r e n e g l i g e n t a s a m a t t e r o f law.
S e c t i o n 61-8-202, MCA r e q u i r e s t h e Department o f High-
ways t o a d o p t t h e r e g u l a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d i n t h e Manual on
T r a f f i c Control Devices. Penn m a i n t a i n s t h a t i n l i g h t o f
t h i s s t a t u t o r y r e q u i r e m e n t , i t i s c l e a r t h a t t h e Manual h a s
t h e f o r c e and e f f e c t o f law. Thus, h e c o n t e n d s t h a t t h e
S t a t e was n e g l i g e n t a s a m a t t e r of law i n f a i l i n g t o s i g n a l -
i z e t h e K o s e l k a c r o s s i n g i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e Manual.
S i m i l a r l y , s e c t i o n 69-14-602, MCA imposes a d u t y on r a i l r o a d
companies t o c o n s t r u c t a n d m a i n t a i n "good and s a f e " c r o s s i n g s .
Penn a s s e r t s B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n was n e g l i g e n t as a m a t t e r
o f l a w by v i o l a t i n g s e c t i o n 69-14-602, MCA, i n t h a t it
f a i l e d t o i n s t a l l t h e t y p e s o f warning d e v i c e s r e q u i r e d by
t h e Manual a t e x t r a - h a z a r d o u s c r o s s i n g s .
Penn's c o n t e n t i o n s a r e n o t convincing. Before respon-
d e n t s c a n b e c h a r g e d w i t h n e g l i g e n c e i n v i o l a t i n g t h e Manual,
i t must f i k s t b e d e t e r m i n e d : (1) t h a t t h e Koselka c r o s s i n g
was e x t r a - h a z a r d o u s , and ( 2 ) t h a t f a i l u r e t o i n s t a l l a d d i t i o n a l
w a r n i n g s i g n a l s was t h e p r o x i m a t e c a u s e o f P e n n ' s i n j u r i e s .
These w e r e q u e s t i o n s o f f a c t f o r t h e j u r y s i n c e c o n f l i c t i n g
e v i d e n c e was o f f e r e d a t t r i a l . A d d i t i o n a l l y , i n Montana,
t h e Manual d o e s n o t have e q u a l d i g n i t y w i t h s t a t u t o r y law.
T h e r e must b e e v i d e n c e t h a t t h e Highway Commission d i r e c t e d
t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n o f a d d i t i o n a l warning s i g n a l s b e f o r e Burlington
N o r t h e r n c a n b e c h a r g e d w i t h a d u t y t o make s u c h i n s t a l l a t i o n s .
~ i l l i a m s . Maley ( 1 9 6 7 ) , 1 5 0 Mont.
v 261, 434 P.2d 398.
here i s no e v i d e n c e i n t h e r e c o r d t h a t t h e Highway Commis-
s i o n i s s u e d such a d i r e c t i v e .
Penn's seventh assignment of e r r o r i s t h e D i s t r i c t
C o u r t ' s f a i l u r e t o charge t h e jury t h a t t h e Public Service
Commission was n e g l i g e n t a s a m a t t e r o f law. I n A p r i l 1973,
t h e Rosebud County Commissioners p r e s e n t e d a p e t i t i o n t o t h e
R a i l r o a d Commission, now t h e P u b l i c S e r v i c e Commission,
r e q u e s t i n g i n s t a l l a t i o n o f warning d e v i c e s a t t h e Koselka
crossing. Penn c o n t e n d s t h e P u b l i c S e r v i c e Commission's
f a i l u r e t o i s s u e a n y o r d e r w h a t s o e v e r v i o l a t e d s e c t i o n 69-
1 4 - 6 2 2 ( 2 ) , MCA and c o n s t i t u t e d n e g l i g e n c e p e r se on t h e p a r t
of the State.
W e c o n c l u d e i t was n o t e r r o r t o r e f u s e p l a i n t i f f ' s
I n s t r u c t i o n No. 32, t h e P u b l i c S e r v i c e Commission i n s t r u c t i o n .
Such a n i n s t r u c t i o n would have i n j e c t e d a n i s s u e upon which
n e i t h e r s i d e had o f f e r e d a n y e v i d e n c e . It is not error t o
r e f u s e a n i n s t r u c t i o n t h a t i s n o t s u p p o r t e d by t h e e v i d e n c e
admitted a t t r i a l . P o r , t e r v . Crum-McKinnon Bldg. Co. (1963),
1 4 2 Mont. 74, 381 P.2d 794. Furthermore, t h e P u b l i c S e r v i c e
Commission's f a i l u r e t o i s s u e a n y o r d e r , e v e n o n e r e f u s i n g
t o o r d e r i n s t a l l a t i o n o f warning d e v i c e s , h a s no r e l e v a n c e
t o causation i n t h i s case.
I n h i s e i g h t h a s s i g n m e n t o f e r r o r , Penn a s s e r t s C o u r t ' s
I n s t r u c t i o n No. 26 c o n c e r n i n g a s s u m p t i o n o f r i s k was i n c o r r e c t
a s a m a t t e r o f law. Penn m a i n t a i n s t h e f a c t s o f t h i s c a u s e
d o n o t i n v o l v e t h e t y p e o f n e g l i g e n t b e h a v i o r t o which a s -
sumption o f r i s k a p p l i e s . Penn c o n t e n d s t h a t a s s u m p t i o n o f
r i s k a p p l i e s o n l y t o a r e l a t i o n s h i p between a p l a i n t i f f and
a d e f e n d a n t , n o t between a p l a i n t i f f and a t h i r d p a r t y . He
further a s s e r t s t h a t it i s insufficient t o point t o the
n e g l i g e n c e o f Dewey, t h e d r i v e r , and P e n n ' s a s s u m p t i o n o f
Dewey's n e g l i g e n t o p e r a t i o n o f h i s van.
W e cannot agree with Penn's contentions. Court's
I n s t r u c t i o n No. 26 was a d a p t e d from Montana J u r y I n s t r u c t i o n
Guide No. 1 3 . 0 0 and i s a c o r r e c t s t a t e m e n t o f Montana law a s
it e x i s t e d a t t h e t i m e t h i s cause arose. S e e Hoffman v .
Herzog ( 1 9 7 1 ) , 1 5 8 Mont. 296, 4 9 1 P.2d 713. Conflicting
e v i d e n c e was a d m i t t e d a t t r i a l a s t o w h e t h e r Penn assumed
t h e r i s k o f h i s i n j u r i e s by r i d i n g w i t h a n i n c o m p e t e n t
d r i v e r . Thus, t h e i n s t r u c t i o n was p r o p e r .
Penn's n i n t h assignment of e r r o r i s t h a t t h e D i s t r i c t
Court e r r e d i n determining t h a t t h e respondents w e r e n o t
l i a b l e f o r p u n i t i v e damages. On O c t o b e r 11, 1978, t h e
D i s t r i c t Court entered an order s t r i k i n g Penn's claim against
t h e S t a t e f o r p u n i t i v e damages on t h e ground t h a t s e c t i o n
82-4324, RCM (1947) d i s a l l o w e d p u n i t i v e damages a g a i n s t t h e
State.
S i m i l a r l y , on t h e l a s t day of t h e t r i a l , respondents
o b j e c t e d t o Penn c a l l i n g a w i t n e s s t o e s t a b l i s h t h e f i n a n c i a l
c o n d i t i o n o f B u r l i n g t o n N o r t h e r n a s a measure by which p u n i -
t i v e damages c o u l d b e a s s e s s e d . The D i s t r i c t C o u r t s u s t a i n e d
t h e o b j e c t i o n on t h e ground t h a t t h e r e was i n s u f f i c i e n t e v i -
d e n c e t o s u b m i t t h e i s s u e o f p u n i t i v e damages t o t h e j u r y .
Penn c o n t e n d s t h e s e r u l i n g s , when combined w i t h t h e
D i s t r i c t C o u r t ' s f a i l u r e t o admit i n t o evidence t h e p e t i t i o n
o f t h e Rosebud County Commissioners, p r e c l u d e d Penn from
p u r s u i n g t h a t p o r t i o n o f P e n n ' s c a u s e r e g a r d i n g a n award o f
p u n i t i v e damages. A s p r e v i o u s l y n o t e d , Penn e n t e r e d i n t o a
s t i p u l a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e p e t i t i o n o f t h e Rosebud County
Commissioners, and t h a t s t i p u l a t i o n was b e f o r e t h e j u r y .
Having e n t e r e d i n t o t h e s t i p u l a t i o n , Penn c a n n o t now c l a i m
prejudice from his failure to have the petition admitted at
trial. See Oregon Automobile Insurance Company, supra.
The jury returned a verdict of no liability for actual
damages on the part of the State and Burlington Northern.
Such a verdict precludes an award of pufiitive damages, thus
Penn suffered no harm from the District Court's ruling
regarding punitive damages. Herde8gen v. Oxarart (1963),
141 Mont. 464, 378 P.2d 655.
Having found no substance to Penn's assignments of
error, the jury verdict in favor of the State and Burlington
Northern is affirmed.
We concur:
Chief Justice
Justices
Mr. Justice John C. Sheehy deems himself disqualified
in this case. Following oral argument herein, Justice
Sheehy learned that one of his former associates may have
represented a party having a collateral claim arising out of
the incident on which this case is based. Since it appears
that such relationship of attorney-client existed before he
c a m e o n t h e C o u r t , J u s t i c e Sheehy h a s t a k e n no p a r t i n t h e
decision o r opinion herein.
Mr. Chief J u s t i c e Frank I. H a s w e l l and J u s t i c e Daniel
J. S h e a c o n c u r i n t h e r e s u l t .