Printable Format66-227. Crossings. It is hereby made the duty of every person or corporation owning or operating any railroad crossed by a public highway, county highway or township road to make, and keep in good repair, good and sufficient crossings for such highway, road or street over their tracks, including all the grading, bridges, ditches and culverts within their right-of-way that may be necessary to make a safe crossing. The vertical profile or alignment of the centerline of the highway, road or street through the crossing shall comply with the American association of state highway and transportation officials (AASHTO) design manual titled, "a policy on geometric design of highways and streets" as published and in effect on January 1, 2001.
When the highway crossing the track is improved by the construction of a hard-surfaced road, the railroad company shall pave the space between the rails and for a distance of two feet on each side thereof with a pavement of the same or a better type for the full width of the pavement on the highway. On other crossings where the highway has not been improved, the planking or other material used between and for a distance of one foot outside of the rails shall be of a length to equal the roadway width measured perpendicular to the axis of the highway. Nothing in this act shall be construed to repeal any provision of law relating to railroad crossings on streets in cities of the first and second class.
History: L. 1915, ch. 280, § 1; L. 1919, ch. 242, § 1; R.S. 1923, 66-227; L. 2001, ch. 15, § 1; July 1.
Source or Prior Law:
L. 1876, ch. 105, § 1; L. 1911, ch. 245, § 1.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Survey of tort liability, Patty Griffin and Harold J. Pickler, 15 W.L.J. 397, 398 (1976).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Highway not regularly laid out not within provisions of statute. M. Kan. & T. Rly. Co. v. Long, 27 Kan. 684, 691, 698.
2. Duty of company to construct safe crossings; liability for damages. A. T. & S. F. Rld. Co. v. Miller, 39 Kan. 419, 18 P. 486.
3. Duty to widen crossings to accommodate new vehicles. Railroad Co. v. Henry, 57 Kan. 154, 160, 45 P. 576.
4. Evidence that highway was properly laid out; safe crossings. The State, ex rel., v. Railway Co., 95 Kan. 22, 25, 147 P. 801.
5. Defective crossing; contributory negligence; question for jury. Dudas v. Railway Co., 105 Kan. 451, 452, 185 P. 28.
6. Approaches to railroad crossings; duty of railroad to maintain. McPherson County v. Railroad Co., 110 Kan. 274, 277, 203 P. 912.
7. Failure to comply with statute must be proximate cause of injury. Cooper v. Railway Co., 117 Kan. 703, 706, 232 P. 1024; Jamison v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Rly. Co., 122 Kan. 305, 252 P. 472.
8. Party crossing track may assume statute complied with. Orr v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Rly. Co., 119 Kan. 751, 755, 241 P. 437.
9. Whether violation of statute proximate cause of injury is jury question. Torgeson v. Missouri-K.-T. Rld. Co., 124 Kan. 798, 800, 262 P. 564.
10. Defective grade must cause injury and be proximate cause. Whitcomb v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Rly. Co., 128 Kan. 749, 750, 280 P. 900.
11. Contributory negligence; no recovery though crossing defective. Brim v. Atchison, T. & S. F. Rly. Co., 136 Kan. 159, 160, 12 P.2d 715.
12. Applicable to state highway crossings until ordered changed by highway commission under 68-414. Pagan v. Lowden, 145 Kan. 513, 517, 518, 66 P.2d 567.
13. Restoration of railroad crossing not required where sufficient inconvenience not shown. State, ex rel., v. Thompson, 148 Kan. 196, 199, 200, 80 P.2d 1070.
14. Crossing held constructed in accordance herewith. Bledsoe v. M.-K.-T. Rld. Co., 149 Kan. 741, 745, 90 P.2d 9.
15. Cited; question of condition of crossing surface beyond railroad's responsibility examined. Sisk v. National R.R. Passenger Corp., 647 F. Supp. 861, 863 (1986).