Atchison

• Decision Date: 11 June 1887
• Citation: Atchison, 14 P. 237, 36 Kan. 769 (Kan. 1887)
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court
• Parties: THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILROAD COMPANY v. MARY JOHNS

14 P. 237

36 Kan. 769

THE ATCHISON, TOPEKA & SANTA FE RAILROAD COMPANY v. MARY JOHNS

Supreme Court of Kansas

June 11, 1887

[Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Error from Greenwood District Court.

ACTION brought by Mary Johns against The Atchison, Topeka &amp Santa Fe Railroad Company, to recover damages for injuries received by her while standing on the railroad company's station platform at Severy, in Greenwood county, by reason of being struck and thrown down by the company's agents and servants in removing a trunk from the platform to the baggage-car of a train then standing at the station. The general verdict of the jury, and the special questions of fact presented to them, with their answers thereto, read as follows:

"We, the jury in the above-entitled cause, do find for the plaintiff, and we assess her damages at the sum of four thousand dollars."

Special questions of fact, and answers:

"1. If the jury find that the plaintiff was injured by the negligence of any of the employes of the defendant, they may state the names of such employes. A. Skidmore, Short, and Crowley.

"2. What are the actual damages which the plaintiff has suffered from the injury complained of, if the jury find she has suffered any? (This question the court refused to submit to the jury.)

"3. Is it not a fact that the plaintiff received the injury complained of upon a platform of a station belonging to the defendant and in its possession and under its exclusive control? A. It was at a platform and station belonging to and in possession and under control of defendant and St. L. &amp S. F. R. R.

"4. Was not the sole and only purpose of the plaintiff in being upon that platform and at that station the purpose of seeing friends off who were going upon a train of cars belonging to the defendant, going north upon that day? A. No.

"5. Is it not a fact that prior to receiving the injury complained of, the plaintiff had seen her friends, whom she was at the station for the purpose of seeing off, onto the cars, and had bid them good-bye, and had left the car on which they were on? A. No.

"6. Is it not a fact that a reasonable time had elapsed from the time she had bid good-bye to the friends she had come to the station to see off, to have enabled her to leave the station and platform before she received the injury complained of? If not, how long a time had elapsed? A. No; about five minutes.

"7. Did not the plaintiff, all the time she was at the station and platform prior to the time of her injury, know that the platform upon which she was standing at the time of her injury was icy and slippery? A. Yes.

"8. Did the plaintiff not know, prior to her injury, that the employes of the defendant were about to move two or more trunks from the point where the trunks were, (in the moving of which she received the injury complained of,) to put the same into the baggage-car on defendant's train at that time? A. Yes.

"9. Is it not a fact that the plaintiff, at the time of her injury, was standing on the platform of defendant's station at Severy at a point between where the trunk was before it was moved, (in the moving of which she received her injury,) and the door of the baggage-car into which the employes of defendant were attempting to put the said trunk? A. No.

"10. Is it not a fact that there were at least three large trunks placed upon the platform of the station at Severy, at and prior to the time of the injury complained of, which were to be loaded into the baggage-car on defendant's train, which was standing by said platform at the time of such injury? A. Yes.

"11. At the time the plaintiff received the injury complained of, had she any business of any kind to transact with the defendant or any of its employes at the station where she was injured? A. No.

"12. What, if anything, prevented the plaintiff from seeing the movement of the trunk, (the moving of which caused the injuries complained of,) at and before the receiving of such injury? A. Nothing.

"13. Did not the plaintiff see the employes of the defendant when they caught hold of the trunk, (the moving of which caused the injury complained of,) at the time they caught hold of it to move it? A. Yes.

"14. Did not the plaintiff see the employes of the defendant as they were moving the trunk, (the moving of which caused the injuries complained of,) from the point where it was toward the baggage car? A. Yes.

"15. If the jury answer the last question in the affirmative, they may state if the plaintiff did not see such employes moving the trunk toward her? A. Yes.

"16. If the jury answer the last question in the affirmative, they may state if the plaintiff did not have time and opportunity to get out of the way of this trunk when she saw it first started toward her, if she had at that time desired to have gotten out of its way? A. Yes.

"17. Was not the plaintiff, at the time of receiving the injuries complained of, through with all her business at the depot? A. No.

"18. Was not such platform level, and about sixteen feet wide? A. Yes.

"19. Had not the plaintiff bid good-bye to her friends who had taken the cars, some little time previous to the accident complained of? A. Yes.

"20. Did not the plaintiff, after the alleged injury, remain standing, looking at the train some ten minutes before it pulled out? If not so long, how long? A. Yes.

"21. Did the plaintiff, previous to leaving the platform that day, inform anyone how the accident happened, and if so, whom? A. No.

"22. Had the plaintiff any business on the platform that day, except going to see some acquaintances at the train? A. Yes; to assist her friends.

"23. How much damage, if you allow plaintiff any, do you allow her for the services of a physician? (This question the court refused to submit to the jury.)

"24. If you allow the plaintiff any damages for the services of a physician, who is the physician for whose services you allow her? A. (This question the court refused to submit to the jury.)

"25. The jury may state how long a time had elapsed from the time plaintiff had bid her friends good-bye to the time when she received her claimed injury? A. About five minutes.

"26. What was there which in any way would have prevented the plaintiff from leaving that portion of the platform which was between the three large trunks and the baggage-car into which they were to be loaded, after the men caught hold of the trunk which plaintiff claims struck her, and commenced to move it toward said baggage-car? A. Nothing, only she was not directly between them.

"27. How far would plaintiff have had to have moved from where she was standing at the time of injury to have got off from that portion of the platform which lay between the baggage-car and the trunk which she claims struck her before the same was moving? A. About twenty feet would have taken her past the baggage-car door.

"28. How long a space of time would it have taken the plaintiff to have left that portion of the platform referred to in the last question, after she saw or knew that the trunk which she claims hit her was to be moved from the point where it was to the baggage-car? A. It would have taken her about one-half minute to have gone that distance.

"29. Is it not a fact that the plaintiff believed that the trunk, which she claims was pushed against her, was to be moved from the spot where she first saw it to the baggage-car north of her before it was actually taken hold of to be moved? A. Yes.

"30. If the jury answer the last question in the affirmative, they may state if it is not a fact that plaintiff knew that in order to move that trunk to the baggage-car that the employes would have to take the same either to one side of her where she was standing, or over the spot on which she was standing? A. Yes.

"31. What was the distance from the point where the three large trunks were standing on the platform, including the one which plaintiff claims struck her, before they were moved to the baggage-car into which they were to be loaded? A. About thirty-eight feet.

"32. What was the distance from the point where the three large trunks referred to in the preceding question were standing before the removal to the baggage-car to the point where plaintiff was standing at the time she claims to have been injured? A. About fifteen feet.

"33. What was the distance from the door of the baggage car into which these trunks referred to in the preceding questions were to be loaded, to the point where the plaintiff was standing at the time she claims to have been injured? A. About twenty-three feet.

"34. About how wide was the trunk which plaintiff claims struck her? A. About two and one-half feet.

"35. About how long was the trunk which the plaintiff claims struck her? A. About three and one-half feet.

"36. How many men had hold of the trunk moving it which plaintiff claims struck her, prior to its striking her, if it did strike her? A. Three.

"37. Which way was this trunk being moved which plaintiff claims struck her, prior to its striking her, as to being moved sideways or endways? A. Endways.

"38. How much space on the platform was necessarily occupied by this trunk and the men moving it, as they moved prior to the time plaintiff claims it struck her? A. About four feet in width.

"39. Did not the drayman who brought the trunks to the station deposit them at a point about the middle of the platform? A. Yes.

"40. Was not the trunk which plaintiff claims injured her started from the point where the drayman had deposited it? A. Yes.

"41. Is it not a fact that the plaintiff, at the time of receiving the injury claimed to have been received, had bid good-bye to the friends she had come to the depot to see off, and was just...