63 So. 345 (Miss. 1913), 16,168, Alabama & Vicksburg Ry. Co. v. White

Docket Nº:16,168
Citation:63 So. 345, 106 Miss. 141
Opinion Judge:REED, J.
Party Name:ALABAMA & V. RY. CO. v. MACK WHITE
Attorney:R. H. & J. H. Thompson, attorneys for appellant. Jas. Thames and R. M. Kelly, attorneys for appellee. Argued orally by R. H. Thompson, for appellant, and R. M. Kelly and J. D. Thames, for appellee.
Case Date:November 24, 1913
Court:Supreme Court of Mississippi
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 345

63 So. 345 (Miss. 1913)

106 Miss. 141

ALABAMA & V. RY. CO.

v.

MACK WHITE

No. 16,168

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 24, 1913

APPEAL from the circuit court of Warren county, HON. H. C. MOUNGER, Judge.

Suit by Mack White against the Alabama & Vicksburg Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff defendant appeals.

The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.

Judgment reversed.

R. H. & J. H. Thompson, attorneys for appellant.

Jas. Thames and R. M. Kelly, attorneys for appellee.

Argued orally by R. H. Thompson, for appellant, and R. M. Kelly and J. D. Thames, for appellee.

OPINION

[106 Miss. 142] REED, J.

Appellee recovered judgment against appellant for one thousand five hundred dollars as damages resulting from injury suffered by him in being scalded on his ankle and leg by hot water from the "overflow pipe" under an engine. On the day he was injured appellee was fireman on an engine pulling a freight train from Vicksburg to Jackson and back. When the train reached Clinton on the return trip, a hot box was discovered under the engine. [106 Miss. 143] Appellee was directed to remedy the trouble. When he started under the engine, he found that water was trickling from the "blowback pipe," or "ash pan blower pipe." He went in under the engine between the "blowback pipe" and the "overflow pipe." It appears from his testimony that there was room for him between the two pipes. He states that water from the "blowback pipe" struck him in the face, and that he then threw his foot up under the "overflow pipe," and was scalded by the hot water pouring from it on his ankle.

In the declaration the right to recover is based upon the defective condition of the engine. We do not see that the proof sustains this claim. It is shown that the appellee had been in the railroad service some sixteen or seventeen years; that he was an experienced fireman, having served as such for ten years; that he was capable of running an engine, and was well informed regarding its construction and equipment. He testifies that before the train left Vicksburg on the day of the accident he cleaned about the engine, oiling it and filling his water tank, and that the engine was then in good shape to make the trip; that he saw nothing wrong with it on the way to Jackson, and, as far as he knew, it was all right when it...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP