Defective Track and Roadbed- Continued.
Raleigh & G. R. Co. (N. Car.), 521 n.
Washout of culvert; injury to Break- passenger caused by.
ing of dam on adjoining prop- erty. Bonner v. Wingate (Tex.), 521 n.
Freight Trains.
Rule forbidding that such trains shall receive passengers at some other place than station or plat- form, is reasonable. Browne v. Raleigh & G. R. Co. (N. Car.), 544.
Contributory Negligence. Alighting at unsuitable place,
where train has been drawn be-
yond station. Contributory negligence of passenger in feeble health, getting off without assistance of employes. Foss
v. Boston & M. R. Co. (N. H.), 566.
Alighting from car on wrong side of train. Contributory negli- gence of passenger violating known rule. Drake v. Penn- sylvania R. Co. (Pa.), 572 n. Alighting from moving train 563 n.
moving train, after station had been called and car door opened. Stopping place un- lighted. England v. Boston & M. R. Co. (Mass.), 563 n.
train moving at the rate of six miles an hour. Passenger run over by train on another track, cannot recover. Dewald v. Kansas City, F. S. & G. R. Co. (Kan.), 557.
moving train. Custom of train to slow up at station. Failure to slacken speed on the occasion in question. Brown v. Chicago M. & St. P. R. Co. (Wis.). 563 n.
moving train. Boy jumping from train to avoid being car- ried past destination. Action by parents. Negligence in the care of child. Avey v. Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co. (Tex.), 565 n.
- moving train. Boy jumping from train to avoid being car- ried past destination; petition held not to show on its face contributory negligence. Avey
Contributory Negligence-Con- tinued.
v. Galveston, H. & S. A. R. Co. (Tex.), 564 n. Alighting from moving train. Fact to be considered in de- termining contributory negli gence of passenger. Little Rock & F. S. R. Co. v. Tankersly (Ark.), 565 n.
moving train. Jumping from wild car running down grade without anyone in charge of it. Western Md. R. Co. v. Herold (Md.), 564 n.
moving train. Passenger failing to alight when train stop- ped; but getting off after it had started. Little Rock & F. S. R. Co. v. Tankersly (Ark.), 565 n.
moving train. Starting train before passenger has time to alight. Leggett v. Western N. Y. & P. R. Co. (Pa.), 563 n.
moving train under failure of train to stop at station, does not justify hazardous attempt to alight. Little Rock & F. S. R. Co. v. Tankersly (Ark.), 564. Boarding train. Conductor rep- resents the company; and per- son boarding car may rely on his assurance that it is safe. Olson v. St. Paul & D. R. Co. (Minn.), 573.
moving train; attempt, is contributory negligence is a mat- ter of law. Jury properly in- structed to find for defendant. Bacon 2. Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. (Pa.), 541 n.
moving train. Passenger cannot recover, unless he shows that there was no manifest risk and that train did not stop long enough to allow him to get on. Browne v. Raleigh & G. R. Co. (N. Car.), 544.
moving train in proximity to projecting platform liable to cause injuries, held contribu- tory negligence although at- tempt was made at direction of conductor. Hunter v. Coopers- town & S. V. R. Co. (N. Y.), 534.
moving train which failed to Conductor stop at station. causing train to suddenly accel- erate its speed while passengers
![[blocks in formation]](https://books.google.gr/books/content?id=esM9AAAAIAAJ&hl=el&output=html_text&pg=PA716&img=1&zoom=3&q=evidence&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U0j6s0GS1WZINhp27_YvNbtKqtL7A&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=128,193,442,65)
are getting on; company held liable. Montgomery & E. R. Co. v. Stewart (Ala.), 541 n. Crossing track at station in order
to reach train. Passenger struck by another train held negligent, and not entitled to recover. Debbins v. Old Col- ony R. Co. (Mass.), 531. Delay of passenger in getting on train. Company not liable for injury caused by starting train before passenger had boarded it. Browne v. Raleigh & G. R. Co. (N. Car.), 544. Getting on car before official an- nouncement that it was ready; contrary to regulation, which was not published or known. Passenger not guilty of contrib- utory negligence. Wester Md. R. Co. v. Herold (Md.), 598 n.
before regular time. Plaint- iff held guilty of contributory negligence. Hodges v. New Hanover T. Co. (N. Car.), 597 n. Intoxicated passenger expelled from train and injured while walking along track, held guilty of contributory negligence. Ham v. President, etc. D. & H. C. Co. (Pa.), 635 n.
Passenger in charge of live stock injured while in the stock car. Carrier owed duty of care to avoid injuring him. Orcutt v. Northern P. R. Co. (Minn.), 598 n.
Postal clerk injured while riding
in mail car; fact that such car was most dangerous, immater- ial to right to recover. Gulf C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Wilson (Tex.), 491 n.
Protruding hand from window of
moving train; no recovery for injuries received. Favre v. Louisville & N. R. Co. (Ky.), 594.
-or arm from ca car window,
Riding in baggage car; held error to charge that conduct of pas- senger amounted to negligence. New York, L. E. & W. R. Co. v. Ball (N. J.), 586.
passenger held to have taken risk of injury from dangers in-
L. E. & W. R. Co. v. Ball (N. J.), 586.
Riding in baggage, mail, and freight cars. 592 #.
Riding on platform of cars, 584 m. -conductor seeing passenger and collecting his fare without objection; company cannot at- tribute injury to occupancy of platform. Olivier . Louisville & N. R. Co. (La.), 576.
![[ocr errors]](https://books.google.gr/books/content?id=esM9AAAAIAAJ&hl=el&output=html_text&pg=PA716&img=1&zoom=3&q=evidence&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U0j6s0GS1WZINhp27_YvNbtKqtL7A&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=611,856,8,7)
Passenger going on platform in fear of disaster. Contribu- tory negligence a question for jury. Mitchell v. Southern Pac. R. Co. (Cal.), 585 #.
Passenger must conduct him- self with such caution as his posi- tion requires. Olivier v. Louis- ville & N. R. Co. (La.), 576.
with knowledge of rule for- bidding it precludes passenger from recovering for injury. McCauley v. Tennessee C., I. & R. Co. (Ala.), 580.
of street car is not negligence per se although there may be room within. Upham v. De- troit City R. Co. (Mich.), 584 #. Sitting on end of open coal car: passenger held to have been negligent as a matter of law. Jackson v. Crilly (Colo.), 597 #. Station platforms; contributory negligence of passengers in us- ing. Watson v. Oxanna L. Co. (Ala.), 529 #.
Stealing ride on switch engine; boy injured, not entitled to re- cover. Egley v. Oregon R. & N. Co. (Wash.), 598 n. Injury from Fellow Passengers. Assaults on passengers by fellow passengers and strangers. Lia- bility of carrier, 651 n. Duty of carrier to exercise highest diligence to protect passenger from violence of fellow passen- gers. Mullen v. Wis. Cent. R. Co. (Minn.), 649. Evidence held not to show a breach of company's duty to pro- tect passengers. Mullan 2. Wis. Cent. R. Co. (Minn.), 649. Passenger jumping from train in consequence of threats of violence and insults of fellow
passengers and employes. Lia- bility of company. Spohn v. Mo. Pac. R. Co. (Mo.), 651 n. Torts of Servants. Assault on passenger by brake- Evidence. Res gestae. Ala. G. S. R. Co. v. Frazier (Ala.), 648 n.
by street car conductor. Company held liable. Savan- nah St. & R. R. Co. v. Bryan (Ga.), 648 n.
for refusal to leave moving train. Ala. G. S. R. Co. v. Frazier (Ala.), 648 n. Liability of carrier for injury to 'passenger through tortious acts of servants, 648.
Servant seizing passenger to pre- vent his boarding moving train. Intoxication of plaintiff. Evi- dence. Harrold v. Winona & St. P. R. Co. (Minn.), 648 n. Street car driver causing arrest
of passenger on false charge of passing counterfeit money. Company liable. Laffite v. New Orleans C. & L. R. Co. (La.), 645.
Street railways must protect pas- sengers against violence and injuries of their own servants. Laffite v. N. O. C. & L. R. Co. (La.), 645.
Attempt to retain seat without paying fare wrongfully de- manded; passenger cannot re- cover damages for injury in- curred by forcible expulsion: He should have paid his fare and left train, and then sorted to his remedy. Peabody v. Oregon R. & N. Co. (Or.), 598. Damages. Excessive damages for wrongful expulsion of pas- senger. What verdicts have been sustained and what set aside, 643 n.
Passenger cannot recover for effort, exposure and expense needlessly incurred by him. Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew (Ga.), 636.
verdict of $750, held to be excessive, cause of action be- ing traceable to mistake of con-
PASSENGERS.
Expulsion-Continued
ductor. Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew (Ga.), 636.
Damages. Wounded feelings; compensation for, should be adjusted for all the circum- stances. Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew (Ga.), 636. Exemplary damages.
Intention of conductor to expel plaintiff, or plaintiff's misunderstanding of him, was relevant evidence. Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew (Ga.), 635.
allowed where there is ejec- tion of passenger from moving train, on a dark night. Fell v. Northern Pac. R. Co. (C. C.), 622 n.
cannot be recovered unless undue force, rudeness, insult or malice is shown. Tomlinson v. Wilmington & S. C. R. Co. (N. Car.), 620.
may be given for wrongful ejectment, if malice and op- pression are shown. Louisville, N. A. & C. R. Co. v. Wolfe (Ind.), 630.
Indecent language used by pas- senger and refusal to pay fare, warrants his expulsion. Louis- ville & N. R. Co. v. Johnson (Ala.), 611.
Identity of person expelling pas- senger. Presumption that per- son pretending to be conductor, was him. Strong proof re- quired to relieve company from liability. Lampkins v. Vicks- burg, S. & P. R. Co. (La.), 622. Injury to passenger for expulsion. Contributory negligence in walking along track. Intoxica- tion. Ham v. President, etc., D. & H. C. Co. (Pa.), 635 n. Intention of conductor to expel plaintiff. The fact that he re- mains silent when plaintiff com- plained about being compelled to get off, should be considered. Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew (Ga.), 635. Leaving train.
Passenger need not wait to be forcibly ejected, if conductor has ordered him to get off. He may leave and ob- tain redress for expulsion. Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew (Ga.), 635.
Expulsion-Continued. Intoxicated passenger, 615 n. Misconduct of conductor towards female passenger, whom he vio- lently expelled on account of her producing ticket punched by! mistake. Johnson v. Northern Pac. R. Co. (C. C.), 634 n. Mistake of conductor is no excuse for expulsion, where it wrongful and passenger denied his rights. Georgia R. & B. Co. v. Eskew (Ga.), 635. Moving train; ejection of tres- passer from, held to render de- fendant liable. Gulf, C. & F. S. R. Co. v. Kirkbride (Tex.), 620 n.
Expulsion of trespasser from train moving slowly, not negli gence per se. Southern Kan. R.
Co. v. Sanford (Kan.), 615. Expulsion. Moving train; ex- pulsion of passenger from, 619 n.
Negligence or wantonness in ex- pelling passenger is a question for jury. Southern Kan. R. Co. v. Sanford (Kan.), 615. Person desiring to be ejected in order to bring suit, cannot re- cover for wounded feelings. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co. v. Trimble (Ark.), 635 n. Place. Company cannot eject passenger for non-payment of fare, except at stopping place. Nichols v. Union Pac. R. Co. (Utah), 615 n.
Place at which passenger may be expelled, 615 n.
of expulsion dangerous only to persons going unnecessarily on the track. Company not lia- ble for death of intoxicated pas- senger expelled. Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Johnson (Ala.), 611.
Profane language; use of, in re- ply to false charge of conduc- tor that passenger's fare had not been paid, will not justify expulsion. Louisville, N. A. & C. R. Co. v. Wolfe (Ind.), 630. Resistance.
Passenger lawfully on car may make reasonable re- sistance to expulsion, and re- cover for injuries received while so resisting. Louisville, N. A.
PASSENGERS.
Expulsion-Continued.
& C. R. Co. v. Wolfe (Ind.), 630. "Round trip ticket." Mistake of conductor in detaching coupon. See TICKETS AND FARES. Tickets and fares. Expulsion of passenger for failure to produce proper ticket or to pay fare. See TICKETS AND FARES.
Injuries around Stations and Station Platforms. See STATIONS. Miscellaneous.
Action for damages against rail- road companies not bona fide. Entrapping company into ex- cuse for bringing suit, 471 m. Alighting from car which plaintiff alleged was not at its customary stopping place. Admissibility of evidence as to such stopping place. Alexandria & F. R. Co. v. Herndon (Va.), 573 n. Alighting from train. Opinion of witness as to the cause of the accident cannot be asked. Kelley v. Detroit, L. & M. R. Co. (Mich.), 572 n.
Passenger carried beyond station platform, may rely on assistance of employes in get- ting off. If she does not notice the distance from step to the ground and they fail to help her, the fault is the carrier's. Foss v. Boston & M. R. Co. (N. H.), 566.
![[ocr errors]](https://books.google.gr/books/content?id=esM9AAAAIAAJ&hl=el&output=html_text&pg=PA718&img=1&zoom=3&q=evidence&cds=1&sig=ACfU3U27eDtkoyAUOaUa6UtXd9qVkxfMkA&edge=0&edge=stretch&ci=911,1150,7,7)
Boarding train. Company liable for injury caused by act of con- ductor in suddenly causing slow- ly moving train to accelerate its speed, while passenger is get- ting on. Montgomery & E. R. Co. v. Stewart (Ala.), 541 #. Carrying passenger beyond station while he was asleep. Stopping car at request of passenger, who was injured while walking back to station. Passenger held to have no redress. Wilson 7. New Orleans & N. E. R. Co. (Miss.), 572 n.
Cause of injury; plaintiff's admis- sions and statements made in his presence as to, held evidence against him. Olivier v. Louis- ville & N. R. Co. (La.), 576. Count in complaint alleging neg ligence for two reasons. Evi-
Miscellaneous-Continued. dence to support one charge only. Alabama G. S. R. Co. v. Hill (Ala.), 501. Degree of care.
Instruction that law requires carriers to exercise strict diligence," not error. Alabama G. S. R. Co. v. Hill (Ala.), 501.
required in carrying passen- gers, is the highest care and skill known. Montgomery, E. R. Co. V. Mallette (Ala.), 500 n. Derailment; injury to passenger caused by. Averments in complaint held sufficiently spe- cific. Gulf, C. & S. F. R. Co. v. Wilson (Tex.), 522 n. Excursion train under manage- ment of third person; liability of company to passenger travel- ing on, 476 n. Express messenger held not chargeable with stipulation for limitation of liability in contract between express company and railroad company. Brewer v. New York, L. E. & W. R. Co. (N. Y.), 485.
Female passenger; carrier not entitled to charge that it owes no greater duty to, than to male passenger. St. Louis, A. & T. R. Co. v. Finley (Tex.), 572 n. Licensee on car; company is re- sponsible for injury or death, only when caused by wanton or intentional wrong. McCauley v. Tennessee C., I. & R. Co., (Ala.), 581. Instruction
a mere trespasser held harmless error. McCauley v. Tennessee C., I & R. Co. (Ala.), 581. Operation of road. Presump-
tion is, that company running the road is the party operating it. Peabody v. Oregon R. & N. Co. (Or.). 599. Overcrowding car. Company is bound to guard passenger on platform from danger. Olivier v. Louisville & N. R. Co. (La.), 576.
passenger voluntarily riding on platform without effort to ob- tain seat, cannot allege over- crowding as negligence. Ol-
PASSENGERS.
Miscellaneous-Continued.
ivier v. Louisville & N. R. Co. (La.), 576.
Passenger in feeble health; notice to conductor that she will re- quire assistance, need not be repeated to every other conduc- tor that may be in charge of the train. Foss v. Boston & M. R. Co. (N. H.), 566.
injury to passenger in feeble health. Liability of carrier, 572 n. Passenger run over at station. Evidence as to rule forbidding trains to pass between station and another train. Lake Shore & M. S. R. Co. v. Ward (I.), 533 n.
Person in charge of live stock, in- jured while in the stock car. Carrier owed duty of care to avoid injuring him. Orcutt v. Northern P. R. Co. (Minn.), 598 n.
Regulation that freight trains shall not stop at platforms of stations to take on or put off passengers, held reasonable. Connell v. Mobile & O. R. Co. (Miss.), 461 n.
Rule forbidding passenger. to stand on platform while car is in motion, is reasonable. Mc- Cauley v. Tennessee C., I. & R. Co. (Ala.), 580.
Sudden starting of car, while pas- senger in care of live stock, was climbing into stock car, having been assured of his safety by the conductor; company liable for injury received. Olson v. St. Paul & D. R. Co. (Minn.), 573.
Trespasser on freight train. Per- son entering car clandestinely in order to beat his way, be- comes a trespasser. Duty of company to him. Hendrix v. Kansas City, F. G. S. & R. Co. (Kan.), 635 n.
PENALTY. See DEATH.
Exposure to penalty does not warrant a party in refusing to discover matters where pros- ecution is barred by statute of limitations. Manchester & L. R. Co. v. Concord R. Co. (N. H.), 359.
Overcharge; voluntary payment
« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια » |