L. &. N.R. Co. v. Southern Railway Co.

• Decision Date: 24 February 1931
• Citation: 237 Ky. 618
• Parties: Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Southern Railway Company.
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

237 Ky. 618

Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Southern Railway Company.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky. (Common Pleas Branch, Fourth Division).

Decided February 24, 1931.

1. Carriers. — In plaintiff railroad's action against defendant railroad for misrouting passenger's ticket, law of sister state in which plaintiff railroad wrongfully ejected passenger from train because of such misrouting held controlling.

2. Statutes. — Ordinarily, law of sister state is fact to be pleaded and proved.

3. Appeal and Error. — Where only basis of action was judgment of sister state affirmed by court of last resort, opinion of such court could be examined to determine amount of recovery and grounds of liability.

4. Indemnity. — Judgment in passenger's action against railroad for wrongful eviction held not conclusive of liability as between such railroad and railroad misrouting passenger's ticket.

5. Evidence. — Court of Appeals presumes that common law prevailed in sister state, where law of such state was not properly before court.

6. Indemnity. — Under common law, there can be no recovery over as between wrongdoers in pari delicto.

7. Indemnity. — Ordinarily, where one does act, and other, not joining in act, is exposed to liability, primary wrongdoer can be compelled to make good loss.

8. Indemnity. — Where passenger recovered from railroad for wrongful eviction, such railroad could not recover from railroad misrouting passenger's ticket.

Appeal from Jefferson Circuit Court

ASHBY M. WARREN and TRABUE, DOOLAN, HELM & HELM for appellant.

HUMPHREY, CRAWFORD & MIDDLETON for appellee.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE CLAY.

Affirming.

The Southern Railway Company maintains an agency on its line at Huntsville, Ala. The agent sells tickets over the lines of the Southern Railway Company and the Louisville & Nashville Railway Company. In the month of April, 1927, Leola Crick and Clara Copeland purchased tickets at Huntsville, Ala., for a trip to Montevallo, Ala., and return. The Southern Railway operates trains in Alabama between Huntsville and Decatur, and between Calera and Montevallo. The Louisville & Nashville Railway Company operates trains between Decatur and Calera, and, though it is possible to go from one of these points to the other over the Southern Railway, the route is much longer. The tickets which the young ladies purchased were sold for a round-trip between Huntsville and Montevallo. The last coupon called for transportation from Huntsville to Decatur over the Southern Railway. The next to the last coupon called for transportation from Decatur to Calera over the Louisville & Nashville Railway. The next coupon from the bottom called for transportation over the Southern from Calera to Montevallo. The next three coupons in reverse order covered the return trip over the Southern Railway, but did not indicate that they were for use over the Louisville & Nashville Railway. The young ladies used these tickets in going from Huntsville to Montevallo. Coming back, they used the first return coupon over the Southern Railway to Calera. Leaving the Southern Railway at that point, they boarded a north-bound Louisville & Nashville train for Decatur. As the return tickets were over the Southern Railway, the Louisville & Nashville conductor refused to honor them, and put the young ladies off the train.

Thereafter they each brought suits against the Louisville & Nashville Railway Company in the circuit court for Limestone county, Ala., to recover damages for their wrongful ejection by the conductor. By amendment they also charged that the man who sold them the tickets was the agent of the Louisville & Nashville Railway Company, and negligently failed to fill out the coupons. On the filing of the suits the Louisville & Nashville Railway Company called on the Southern Railway Company to defend, and the Southern Railway Company refused to do so. The cases proceeded to trial, and resulted in a verdict in favor of each of the girls against the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company in the sum of $1,500. The circuit court required each of the plaintiffs to remit the excess over $1,000, and entered judgment in favor of each for $1,000. On appeal to the Supreme Court of Alabama, the judgments were affirmed for $600 each. Louisville & Nashville Railway Co. v. Crick, 217 Ala. 547, 117 So. 167; Louisville & Nashville Railway Co. v. Copeland, 217 Ala. 556, 117 So. 176.

After the affirmance of the judgments, the Louisville & Nashville Railway Company brought this action in the Jefferson circuit court to recover the amount of judgments and interest, together with court costs and attorneys' fees, incurred in defending the Alabama actions. The petition specifically refers to the judgments in the lower court, the affirmance thereof by the Alabama Supreme Court, and cites the two cases in the Southern Reporter. The ground on which a recovery was sought is that the loss and damage resulting to plaintiff was due solely and entirely to the negligence of the defendant and its agent at Huntsville, Ala., in selling to the plaintiffs in the Alabama actions tickets which were invalid over the lines of the Louisville & Nashville Railroad, thereby making it necessary for the conductor to put the ladies off the train. After its demurrer to the petition was overruled, the Southern Railway Company filed an answer, denying in the first paragraph certain allegations of the petition, and pleading in the second paragraph "that the final judgments which are the foundation of the plaintiff's claim against the defendant herein were rendered pursuant to opinions by the Supreme Court of Alabama, in which opinions the facts and law involved were decided as therein set out. Said opinions are now reported in 117 So. at pages 167 and 176, and are as follows." Then followed printed copies of the two opinions taken from the Southern Reporter. To this paragraph of the answer a demurrer was sustained on the ground that the judgment in the Alabama actions settled the issue of negligence between the plaintiffs in that action and the Louisville & Nashville Railroad, but did not determine the issue of negligence between the two railroads. Thereafter the motion to set aside the order sustaining the demurrer to the second paragraph of the answer was overruled.

At the trial before the jury, plaintiffs in the Alabama actions, in addition to other facts, deposed as follows ...