This
action was brought by M. E. Bronson, the plaintiff in error
against Thomas F. Oakes, Henry C. Payne, and Henry C. Rouse
as receivers of the Northern Pacific Railroad Company, the
defendants in error, to recover damages for a personal injury
received while traveling as a passenger on a train on the
Northern Pacific Railroad, operated by the defendants as
receivers. The action was commenced in the district court of
Hennepin county, Minn., and, on the application of the
defendants in error, removed into the circuit court of the
United States for the district of Minnesota.
Omitting
the formal parts, the complaint reads as follows:
'Plaintiff
further alleges: That on the 30th day of December, 1893
this plaintiff, in company with his wife, took passage at
the city of St. Paul, in the state of Minnesota, on a
regular passenger train on said Northern Pacific Railroad,
operated by said defendants, for the purpose of traveling
over the same westward from said state to the Pacific
coast, upon a route of said railway, conducted and operated
by said defendants, and that the plaintiff duly purchased
from the agent of said defendants at the said city of St.
Paul the usual and regular tickets for such passage over
said railway, and paid to said defendants the regular fare
for said tickets for said passage and travel over said line
of railway. That the said train consisted of the usual
sleeping and day coaches, baggage and express car; and that
said train was a 'vestibule train,' so called, with
the passageways between said cars wholly inclosed in
so-called 'vestibules,' each of said vestibules
having an outer door opening upon the steps at the end of
each of said cars, and which said so-called
'vestibules' were and are designed for the
protection of passengers traveling upon trains operated by
said defendants on said line of railway, and to enable
passengers to pass with safety through the passenger trains
operated by said defendants; and that upon said train in
which plaintiff was so traveling at the time of the
occurrence and consequent injury to plaintiff hereinafter
mentioned there was maintained upon said train by said
defendants free and uninterrupted access through said
vestibules, for the accommodation and convenience of the
passengers on said train, passing through the same, both in
the night and day time, from car to car.
'Further
complaining, plaintiff further alleges: That the passage
from said city of St. Paul, Minnesota, over the line of
said railway, to plaintiff's destination, does and did
consume several days and nights of continuous travel; and
plaintiff and his said wife, while so traveling on said
train as aforesaid, and on the night of December 31, 1893,
were occupying berths upon the rear sleeping coach of said
train, and that at the hour of about 11:30 p.m. on the
night of said day the plaintiff, as he lawfully might, and
for the purpose of passing to the forward end of said train
upon which he was so traveling, in order to obtain from the
conductor in charge of said train a stop-over check at a
point on said line of railway where plaintiff desired to
stop over on said journey, left said rear sleeping coach,
and walked through said train towards the forward end
thereof, for the purpose of aforesaid, and, having
transacted said business with the conductor in charge
thereof, plaintiff started to return to his said berth in
said rear coach at about the hour aforesaid. That at said
time all of the coaches upon said train were dimly lighted,
and that the vestibule connections between said several
cars through which plaintiff, for the purpose aforesaid,
was compelled to and did pass had been and were by said
defendants carelessly left and were in a wholly darkened
condition, without any lights therein. That the outer door
in one of said vestibuled connections, through which
plaintiff so passed, had been by said defendants carelessly
and negligently left unfastened and open, which fact was
wholly unknown to this plaintiff. That plaintiff, in
returning to said rear sleeping coach on said train at the
time aforesaid, and in passing through said vestibule, as
he lawfully might, and without any notice or knowledge on
his part that said outer vestibule door was so open as
aforesaid, and without any fault or negligence on his part,
fell from said train through said open outer vestibule
door, so carelessly and negligently as aforesaid left
unfastened and open by said defendants, and, so falling,
was precipitated from said train with great force and
violence, and then and there fell from said train, while
said train was running at a rapid rate of speed, and while
the same was passing over a certain lake in the state of
Idaho, known as 'Lake Pend d'Oreille,' on a
trestle bridge about 22 feet in height above the waters of
said lake, into which plaintiff fell. That plaintiff, as a
result of said fall, broke and fractured the bone of his
left leg between the knee and the ankle joint, and was
otherwise bruised, maimed, and wounded, thereby causing
plaintiff great physical pain and anguish. That said place
was in an uninhabited district, with no means near at hand
whereby plaintiff could obtain aid or assistance; and that,
plaintiff's fall from said train being unnoticed by the
operatives thereof, the same passed rapidly beyond the
sight and hearing of this plaintiff. That the point upon
said bridge where plaintiff so fell as aforesaid from said
train was distant about three-quarters of a mile from the
shores of said lake. That the weather at that time was
intensely cold, below the freezing point, and the ground
covered with snow and ice; and that, although plaintiff was
greatly exhausted and prostrated as the result of said
fall, and was suffering great pain and anguish from his
said broken limb, plaintiff nevertheless, by great physical
exertion, and suffering intense pain from his broken limb,
and there being no other means of escape from his perilous
and dangerous position, was compelled to and did climb upon
the piling of said bridge to the track thereon, and with
great difficulty dragged himself along said bridge to the
main land; and that by reason of the unfrequented district
where said occurrence took place plaintiff was unable to
and did not receive any aid or assistance until the hour of
about 5 o'clock a.m. on January 1, 1894. That
plaintiff's clothing was thoroughly and completely
drenched with water, and by reason of the inclement weather
his clothing froze upon his person, whereby plaintiff
suffered additional pain and anguish and discomfort; and
that, as a consequence of his said injuries and the
attendant results therefrom, plaintiff's nervous
system was greatly shocked and impaired, and his health, as a
consequence thereof, has been, as plaintiff is informed and
verily believes, permanently undetermined and impaired; and
that plaintiff was confined to his bed for a long period of
time thereafter, and suffered great mental and physical pain,
anguish and suffering, caused by his said injuries and his
exposure, and that he still suffers therefrom; and, as
plaintiff is informed and believes, he will never recover
from the effects of his said injuries and exposure as
aforesaid.
'Plaintiff
further alleges: That the forward end of the coach upon said
train into which plaintiff was endeavoring to pass at the
time he fell from said train as hereinbefore alleged had an
inclosed compartment, occupying the entire width of said car,
except a narrow aisle along the side thereof; and that
persons entering said car, in order to pass through the same,
are required to make a sharp turn to the left, and pass down
said aisle. That said open outer vestibule door through which
plaintiff so fell was on the left hand of plaintiff as he
passed through said vestibule. That plaintiff, in passing
through said vestibule, saw through said open outer vestibule
door, but which opening he supposed and believed was the
entrance into said car, a dim light, which shone through the
windows of said car, and which light plaintiff supposed and
believed was the light from the car shining through said
passageway or aisle into which plaintiff supposed and
believed he was passing. That when plaintiff passed out of
said car, going to the forward end of said train, and a few
seconds before he returned, plaintiff, to facilitate his
return, left the end door of the coach into which he was
about passing when he fell from said car open; and that the
light which plaintiff saw through said outer open vestibule
door he supposed and believed was the light from said car
into which he was about passing, shining through said narrow
aisle; and that plaintiff, so mistaking said light, visible
through said open vestibule door, for the light shining
through said aisle, turned to the left, for the purpose, as
he supposed, of passing into said aisle, and, so turning,
walked or fell through said open outer vestibule door,
sustaining the injuries hereinbefore complained of.
'Plaintiff
further alleges that it was the duty of the said defendants
in operating said train, and particularly in the nighttime
to keep securely fastened and closed the outer vestibule
doors on said cars, and to furnish sufficient light in said
vestibules to enable passengers upon said train to pass in
safety through the same; and that plaintiff suffered and
sustained said injuries wholly by reason of the carelessness
and negligence of said defendants in allowing and permitting
said outer vestibule door on said train through which
plaintiff fell as aforesaid to be and remain in said open and
unguarded condition, and in failing to provide lights in said
cars and vestibules, by reason...
