Halsall v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co.

• Decision Date: 22 November 1913
• Citation: 80 S.E. 467,96 S.C. 308
• Parties: HALSALL v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

80 S.E. 467

96 S.C. 308

HALSALL v. ATLANTIC COAST LINE R. CO.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

November 22, 1913

On Petition for Rehearing, January 7, 1914.

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Charleston County; Geo. E Prince, Judge.

Action by John R. Halsall against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

W Huger Fitz Simons, of Charleston, for appellant.

Logan & Grace, of Charleston, for respondent.

FRASER J.

The first question to be considered in this case is the motion to dismiss the appeal on the ground that there is no valid notice of appeal. A verdict for plaintiff was rendered on the 6th October, 1912.

The case does not show when the court adjourned, but the notice of appeal is dated "November 13, 1912." The order refusing the new trial is dated "December 23 1912." The notice of appeal is from the judgment "entered or to be entered." The agreed case contains this statement, "Judgment upon the verdict was entered and notice of appeal duly served." We will proceed to consider the case.

Appellant's attorney thus states his case: "This action was commenced March 9, 1911. The case came on for a second trial before Honorable George E. Prince, circuit judge, and a jury at the October term, 1912. The action is for damages for personal injuries to plaintiff, a brakeman in the service of the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. The injury complained of was caused in the Charleston yard by a 'sidewiping' collision near a switch, between engine 335, which plaintiff, as brakeman, was piloting through said yard, and a string of cars on an adjoining track, which were being moved by a shifting engine. The suit was brought against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, John Cameron, and G. L. Graham. John Cameron was conductor of the shifting engine and cars. G. L. Graham was engineer of the engine which was being piloted by plaintiff at the time of the accident. The verdict was against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company alone. The accident occurred near a switch where two parallel tracks came together in the yard. It occurred about 10 o'clock at night on August 5, 1910. The collision was caused by failure of engine 335 to stop before reaching the point of the collision near the switch. Engine 335 was manned by G. L. Graham, the engineer, John R Halsall, the plaintiff, a brakeman, and R. W. Hammock, fireman. Plaintiff, as brakeman, was upon the pilot on the front of the engine with his lantern, and his duty was to pilot engine 335 through the yard by signaling to Engineer Graham and protecting by signals the movement of the engine. Graham, the engineer, was moving the engine, and his duty was to move the same in obedience to the signals from Halsall, the plaintiff. Graham and Halsall were co-operators in this work, each with a part to perform, and the safety of each dependent upon the careful performance of the duty by the other. Engine 335, at the time of the accident, was being moved from the roundhouse through the yard for the purpose of being placed as the engine on train 222, a freight train from Charleston to Columbia, S.C. This train (222) was made up in this way every night. Under the rules of the company, the yardmaster has charge of the yards where trains are made up, of the men employed, and of the movement of trains and distribution of cars therein. While in the yard, engineers and brakemen 'receive their instructions and must obey orders of the yardmaster in regard to shifting and making up of trains.' The conductor of the train has no control and nothing to do with the movement until the engine is attached to his train as a part of it, and he has received his orders. The movement of the engine in the yard to make up the train is solely under the direction and control of the yardmaster. The yardmaster in such movement is the superior officer, and bears precisely the same relation to the engineer and brakeman operating the engine that the conductor bears to them when the train is made up and operated out on the road. On this occasion, Graham, the engineer, and Halsall, the brakeman, had received their orders from the yardmaster, as usual, for the movement of...