Penland v. Southern Railway Co‪.‬

Conceding the existence of negligence on the part of the defendants, which is stressfully denied, we think the case is controlled by the fact that plaintiff drove his automobile upon the railroad crossing in the face of an on-coming train which he saw, or, in the exercise of reasonable care, should have seen. This negligence on his part contributed to the injury, and bars recovery. Swaim v. High Point, 214 N.C. 672, 200 S.E., 373; Bailey v. R.R., 223 N.C. 244, 25 S.E.2d 833; Goodwin v. R.R., 220 N.C. 281, 17 S.E.2d 137.