Missouri Revised Statutes

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 389.797 (2026)

Employee walkways to be kept clear, enforcement

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MO-REVrevisor.mo.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

  389.797.  Employee walkways to be kept clear, enforcement. — Any person, firm or corporation doing business in this state shall keep and maintain those margins alongside their tracks, where railroad employees are required to walk in the course of their duties, reasonably free from debris, vegetation and any hazards known or which should have been known to exist, which affect the safety of such employees.  The division may enforce this section and prosecute any violation thereof.  The division shall prescribe rules for the construction and maintenance of walkways and the materials used in such walkways.  Any track found to be in violation of this section may be removed from service by order of the division.

­­--------

(L. 1961 p. 416 §§ 1, 2, A.L. 1988 S.B. 676)

CROSS REFERENCE:

Division of motor carrier and railroad safety abolished, duties and functions transferred to highways and transportation commission and department of transportation, 226.008

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1975–2022 · leading case: Missouri Pac. R.R. v. Rental Storage & Transit Co., 524 S.W.2d 898 (Mo. Ct. App. 1975).
Missouri Pac. R.R. v. Rental Storage & Transit Co., 524 S.W.2d 898 (Mo. Ct. App. 1975). “A further contention made by Industry is that the indemnity provisions of the spur track agreement are void and unenforceable because they permit the Railroad to be indemnified against the consequences of its own illegal acts.”
Webb v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. (W.D. Mo. 2020). · cites it 6× “§ 389.797, which would support a negligence per se finding, is precluded by the FRSA, and in the alternative, Plaintiff has failed to produce evidence that Defendant violated § 389.”
Blackmore v. Union Pac. R.R. Co. (D. Neb. 2022). · cites it 4× “The Court will address these three theories of liability in turn and concludes genuine disputes of material fact preclude summary judgment as to Blackmore’s claims under the SAA and Mo. Rev. Stat. § 389.797 . Union Pacific is entitled to summary judgment on Blackmore’s LIA claim.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.