Abston v. Waldon Academy
Decision Date | 13 May 1907 |
Citation | 102 S.W. 351 |
Parties | ABSTON v. WALDON ACADEMY. |
Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Davidson County; John W. Childress, Judge.
Action by Minnie Abston, by her next friend, against the Waldon Academy. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
J. B. Daniels and Paul Hoggins, for appellant. James Trimble and J. C. Bradford, for appellee.
The defendant in error is a corporation chartered in 1866 by the Legislature of Tennessee under the name and style of the "Central Tennessee Methodist Episcopal College," which original name was by subsequent enactment changed to that of "Waldon Academy." This institution was incorporated for purely education purposes in the interest of the negro race, then but recently emancipated. Being an eleemosynary corporation, it issued no stock, and it has paid no dividends. Its foundations were laid in charitable donations, and during its entire history, according to the averments of the special plea in this cause, confessed by demurrer to be true, it has "been operated and conducted from bequests," and "its grounds, buildings, and trust funds" have come from such bequests; the whole, "according to the expressed will of the donors," "to be held in trust as a public charity."
Minnie Abston, for whose use this suit was brought, was a pupil of this institution, and on the night of the 18th of December, 1903, she occupied a room in a three-story building erected by the corporation on the Academy grounds to furnish sleeping apartments for the young girls in attendance upon the school, when it took fire, and in an attempt to escape from the flames she leaped from a window on the third floor and was seriously injured. This action was brought to recover damages for the injuries thus sustained, on the ground that an ordinance of the city of Nashville, within whose limits this building stood, required the erection of "suitable and sufficient fire escapes" on a building of the character of the one in question, and that the same duty was imposed by chapter 178 of the Acts of the Legislative Session of 1899, and by reason of the failure of the corporation to erect fire escapes it was impossible for plaintiff in error to escape death, save as she did in the manner above indicated. The question is: Can such an action be maintained where, if so, the property placed by benevolent parties under the control of this corporation for what is well settled in this state to be a charitable use (Franklin v. Armfield, 2 Sneed, 305) must be appropriated to its satisfaction?
We are satisfied that neither on principle nor on authority can this be done. The leading case on this subject is that of Feoffees of Heriot's Hospital v. Ross (House of Lords Cases) 12 Clark & Finnelly, 507. The facts there were that in 1623 one George Heriot by will left to the municipal authorities of the city of Edinburgh a fund to be used by them in the purchase of lands, upon which was to be erected a hospital within the limits of that city, to be maintained in perpetuity, for the "relief, bringing up, and education of such poor, fatherless boys, freemen's sons, of the town," as the means thus given would provide for. An applicant, coming within the description of those thus named by the donor, was refused by the authorities upon whom was devolved the corporate duty of admitting applicants to the hospital, whereupon he brought his suit to recover damages for his assumed wrongful rejection. From the judgment of the Scotch court, awarding damages payable out of the trust funds, the case was carried by writ of error to the House of Lords of England. It was there held that a charitable institution, such as was the one in question, was exempt from damages for negligence of its trustees. In the course of his opinion Lord Cottenham used this language:
Lord Brougham, in the course of his opinion in this case, said: To like effect is the opinion of Lord Campbell.
It is said, however, by the counsel representing the plaintiff below in this cause, that this case was overruled by the later case of Merse Dock Trustees v. Gibbs, 11 House of Lords, 686. Nowhere in the opinion of Mr. Justice Blackburn, or those of the Lord Chancellor and Lord Westbury, all of which recommended an affirmance of the judgment in the court below against the trustees, is the earlier case referred to. This omission, we think, can be accounted for only on the ground that the two cases were regarded as essentially dissimilar, and that the principle controlling in the one was not to be applied in the other.
Mr. Justice Blackburn, in his opinion, traces the legislative history of the Merse Docks. He said that
The learned judge, after giving the various acts of the Parliament passed with regard to these docks, and setting out the powers of the trustees, as well as the manner of the appropriation of the revenues derived by these trustees from the dock and warehouse rates, then adds:
We think these extracts show very clearly that the principle upon which rests...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sessions v. Thomas D. Dee Memorial Hospital Ass'n
... ... Cornell University , 240 N.Y ... 328, 148 N.E. 539, 42 A. L. R. 955; St. Mary's ... Academy v. Solomon , 77 Colo. 463, 238 P. 22, 42 ... A. L. R. 964; Roberts v. Ohio Valley General ... Woman's College of Due ... West , 104 S.C. 197, 88 S.E. 649; Tennessee: ... Abston v. Waldon Academy , 118 Tenn. 24, 102 ... S.W. 351, 11 L. R. A., N. S., 1179; Lincoln Memorial ... ...
-
President and Dir. of Georgetown College v. Hughes
...254, 75 A. 1087, 136 Am.St.Rep. 879; Adams v. University Hospital, 1907, 122 Mo.App. 675, 99 S.W. 453; Abston v. Waldon Academy, 1907, 118 Tenn. 24, 102 S.W. 351, 11 L.R.A.,N.S., 1179. 59 Southern Methodist Hospital and Sanatorium v. Wilson, 1935, 45 Ariz. 507, 46 P.2d 118; Hearns v. Waterb......
-
Roosen v. Peter Bent Brigham Hosp.
...60 N. W. 42,25 L. R. A. 602, 45 Am. St. Rep. 427;Perry v. House of Refuge, 63 Md. 20, 52 Am. Rep. 495;Abston v. Waldon Academy, 118 Tenn. 24, 102 S. W. 351,11 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1179. The same result is reached in Maia v. Eastern State Hospital, 97 Va. 507, 34 S. E. 617,47 L. R. A. 577, thoug......
-
Weston's Adm'x v. Hosp. Of St. Vincent Of Paul
...6 Am. St. Rep. 745; Gable v. Sisters of St. Francis, 227 Pa. 254, 75 Atl. 1087, 136 Am. St. Rep. 879; Abston v. Waldon Academy, 118 Tenn. 24, 102 S. W. 351, 11 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1179; Downes v. Harper Hospital, 101 Mich. 555, 60 N. W. 42, 25 L. R. A. 602, 45 Am. St. Rep. 427; Fordyce v. Woma......