O.C.G.A.

O.C.G.A. § 46-8-197 (2019)

Legal responsibility of member of train crew, yard crew, or engine crew for occupying or blocking street, road, or highway grade crossing pursuant to employer's order

✓ O.C.G.A. (archive.org 2024 item): print volumes of 2004-2024, per-volume vintage; older volumes partly replaced by 2019 Release 73 text; no 2025 or 2026 Acts
Code text and O.C.G.A. statutory annotations on this page reflect the 2019 Official Code of Georgia Annotated (Public.Resource.Org Release 73, 2019-08-21; public domain per Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). The Syfert case-law annotations in Notes of Decisions, below, are current.
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section GA-LEGlegis.ga.gov (official) JustiaJustia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No member of a train crew, yard crew, or engine crew of a railroad common carrier shall be held personally responsible under, or found guilty of violating, any state laws or municipal ordinances regulating or intended to regulate the occupying or blocking of any street, road, or highway grade crossing by engines or passenger or freight cars, upon reasonable proof by the crew member that the occupying or blocking of the grade crossing was necessary to comply with the orders or instructions, either written or oral, of his employer or of the officers or supervisory officials of the company owning the railroad over which the engine or cars are operated; provided, however, that this Code section shall not relieve the employer or railroad company from any responsibility placed upon such employee or railroad company by any such state laws or municipal ordinances.

History

(Ga. L. 1965, p. 645, § 1.)

Annotations

JUDICIAL DECISIONS

Editor's notes. - The decision cited below was decided under former law.

Pedestrian not trespasser where railroad has blocked crossing. - Where a railroad company blocks with its cars a crossing on a public highway for a needless or unreasonable length of time, a pedestrian, after waiting a reasonable time for such cars to be removed, may turn aside to avoid the obstruction and pass over property of the company without being a trespasser in so doing, and in such a case the questions as to the reasonableness of the time of blocking and waiting, whether the company owed to the pedestrian the duty, under the facts and circumstances, of anticipating the pedestrian's presence, and the diligence due and exercised by the company for the pedestrian's safety, are jury questions. Yarbrough v. Georgia R.R. & Banking Co., 48 Ga. App. 314, 172 S.E. 808 (1934) (decided under former law).

Cited in Britt v. City of Gainesville, 118 Ga. App. 40, 162 S.E.2d 740 (1968).

RESEARCH REFERENCES

ALR. - Negligence in leaving cars where they obstruct view at crossing, 47 A.L.R. 287.

Liability of railroad to adult pedestrian attempting to pass over, under, or between cars obstructing crossing, 27 A.L.R.2d 369.

Contributory negligence of child injured while climbing over or through railroad train blocking crossing, 11 A.L.R.3d 1168.