The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Geese and Trains
Sam Bray's very interesting "Animals, Fractions, and the Interpretive Tyranny of the Senses in the Dictionary" led me to look up the case he began with, and I thought it was amusing enough to pass along in full; it's Nashville & K.R. Co. (Tenn. 1902):
This is an action for damages against the railroad company for running over and killing three geese of the value of $1.50. The owner of the geese lived about one mile from the railroad, but permitted them to run at large, and they went upon the railroad track near a public crossing. The engineer blew the whistle and rang the bell for the crossing, but there is no proof that he rang the bell or sounded the alarm for the geese. Whether the geese knew of this failure to whistle for them does not appear.
We think there is no evidence of recklessness or common-law negligence shown in the case, and the only question is whether a goose is an animal or obstruction in the sense of the statute, which requires the alarm whistle to be sounded, and brakes put down, and every possible means employed to stop the train and prevent an accident when an animal or obstruction appears on the track. It is evident that this provision is designed, not only to protect animals on the track, but also the passengers and employés upon the train from accidents and injury. It would not seem that a goose was such an obstruction as would cause the derailment of a train, if run over.
It is true, a goose has animal life, and, in the broadest sense, is an animal; but we think the statute does not require the stopping of trains to prevent running over birds, such as geese, chickens, ducks, pigeons, canaries, or other birds that may be kept for pleasure or profit. Birds have wings to move them quickly from places of danger, and it is presumed that they will use them (a violent presumption, perhaps, in the case of a goose, an animal which appears to be loath to stoop from its dignity to even escape a passing train). But the line must be drawn somewhere, and we are of the opinion that the goose is a proper bird to draw it at. We do not mean to say that in the case of recklessness and common-law negligence there might not be a recovery for killing geese, chickens, ducks, or other fowls, for that case is not presented.
Snakes, frogs, and fishing worms, when upon railroad tracks, are, to some extent, obstructions; but it was not contemplated by the statute that for such obstructions as these trains should be stopped, and passengers delayed….
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
That all makes perfect sense as a matter of policy, but I have to disagree as a matter of law. If the legislature wanted to narrow the class of animals covered, it knew how to do so. A simple qualifier about animals that could cause injuries or derailments if hit was easy enough to put in there. As written, it’s entirely possible that the legislature wanted to compensate animal owners for their losses, and to encourage train operators to take actions to mitigate such losses. Maybe finding for the geese owner would have spurred the legislature to action. But with this ruling it had no need, and the court just opened up the door to more potential litigation over what animals were covered.
The legislature could correct this, if it wanted to.
Sure, but the court is still supposed to get it right in the first instance.
There is an inherent limitation. It is entirely unreasonable to impose liability for a train hitting an animal that the engineer couldn't have possibly seen from far enough away to have a chance of stopping.
It can take more than a mile for a freight train to stop.
So squirrel, no. Goose, maybe. Terrain, track layout, and structures near the track will all matter.
Matthew:
But it isn't just about the train stopping. It is also about the train sounding the whistle and slowing down. Which gives the animal both more time and more motivation to get out of the way. Completely stopping is about preventing the train from hitting the animal. But slowing down and sounding the whistle is about causing the animal to move out of the way.
"It is also about the train sounding the whistle and slowing down."
A train can not slow down instantaneously.
"But slowing down and sounding the whistle is about causing the animal to move out of the way."
I don't think this is a good argument, not with animals. The whistle might cause some animals to move out of the way, but others might ignore it or freeze (the phrase dear in the headlights comes to mind).
I have personally had encounters with wild geese in parking lots where laying on my horn had no effect at all.
Again, the engineer has to see the animal before he can slow down or blow the whistle. And if the animal is too small, it will be too late even for slowing down/blowing the whistle by the time the engineer is aware of the animal.
"As written, it’s entirely possible that the legislature wanted to compensate animal owners for their losses, and to encourage train operators to take actions to mitigate such losses."
If That was the legislatures intent, they should have included language that would exclude wildlife.
Without it being limited to domestic animals, it makes more sense that the concern was derailments and injuries to train passengers.
They could also make a law that "domestic animals" not be allowed to run free if they were so concerned about them.
This brings up another question. Is a domestic animal property? Several years ago my neighbor had a dog that had Cancer. The Vet wanted $500 to put the dog down. She didn't have the money so I took the dog out and shot it. Then we buried it in her yard with a marker. Somebody from the Vet's Office had the Humane Society do a spot check on the dog. When they found out that the dog was dead and how it died they threatened criminal charges.
"Looks like goose is back on the menu, boys!"
Excellent reference!
"$1.50 goose lawsuit? Here's your 50¢, lawyer. Good job."
Well, that was back in 1902, so it'd be worth more now. About $50 more, in fact.
For comparison, the internet suggests that live adult geese are currently worth between $25 and $250 each, depending on breed and size.
Still not exactly earth shattering.
$13.02
Did the Geese have large Talons?
Like any of the Poindexters on this "Conspiracy" will get that reference
Frank
I don't understand a word you just said.
It's a riff on Napoleon Dynamite: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAtoMSjOQ1A
Make that two
One Poindexter
You know, this seems like the perfect example of a case where Judges should really just have the ability to submit a priviliged question to the relevant legislature, along the lines of "Did you really mean to include X, and why?"
It's just some geese. I doubt the legislature is going to lie about their retroactive intent over a case THIS banal.
I think that could distort the legal process, as the legislator asked the question could determine the context, and other factors could creep into his answer.
Legislature, the entire body, not a single individual.
And of course there would have to be rules about how formal legislative answers to questions about laws can never go any farther than the law itself does, nor defy the plain meaning of the law...
Talk about loosey goosey interpretation!
Geese are aggressive -- I had one try to bite the tire of my car,
I would not be surprised to learn the goose attacked the train.
In the late 20th century American road design rules told engineers to provide enough sight distance for a driver to stop in time to avoid hitting a six inch object in the road. The object size was changed to two feet around the turn of the century to match driver behavior. Drivers were not seeing and stopping for six inch objects.
I have been in a dangerous situation when geese crossed a highway ahead of me. Stopping in 70 mph traffic is likely to get you hit.
...almost a certainty, since tailgating is endemic on the roads today.
Had a flock of geese come into a small airport that I worked at. It was a busy day and I'm still surprised that none of the planes hit one.
This is the second animals on train tracks post this week. What's up with that?
The pro-train, anti-animal agenda of the VC.
It's a follow-up on the same case, so fair enough. I was thinking of buying a goose for Christmas dinner a few years ago and Scrooge was very generous, as if he's had the fear of Death put into him.
Prof. Volokh,
Somewhat tangential here's a recent "Grizzlies and Trains" Complaint; larger animals' death by locomotive, and Endangered Species Act. https://www.trains.com/trn/news-reviews/news-wire/bnsf-sued-over-grizzly-bear-deaths-in-montana/ (link to Complaint is in article). [I expect eventually an awareness that "grizzlies" are no longer "endangered" is inevitable.]
Reminds me of a local case brought years ago. A local woman owned a pig, but did not live in an agricultural area. She insisted that pigs were every bit as noble as race horses which were lawful to own in a non-agricultural area (this is Lexington, Kentucky—Horse Capitol of the world).
She appealed to the circuit judge on equal protection and due process. I’ve lost the opinion but found an article about the case with some of the judge’s comments. https://books.google.com/books?id=KxKhMl-5w1oC&pg=PT1&lpg=PT1&dq=doris+binion+pig&source=bl&ots=ZeUX9bIp0I&sig=ACfU3U1GUUWHWulu7CvS8ySfLhTs9_kZ3g&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjeq7eGp8KEAxV0G9AFHeBGDKwQ6AF6BAgfEAI#v=onepage&q=doris%20binion%20pig&f=false
"Why does this 'noble' pig of yours have only three legs?"
"A pig as noble as that, you don't eat all at once."
So, what is an "insurrection"? 🙂
Sure, I get it, but slamming on the brakes for a goose is a bit much. And it's not like it'll understand the horn anyway. Just watch out for your bird, you know?