Billingsley v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain and Southern Railway Company
Decision Date | 16 December 1907 |
Citation | 107 S.W. 173,84 Ark. 617 |
Parties | BILLINGSLEY v. ST. LOUIS, IRON MOUNTAIN AND SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY |
Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court; Frederick D. Fulkerson, Judge affirmed.
STATEMENT BY THE COURT.
This suit was instituted by one G. W. Hurley against the appellee to recover damages in the sum of $ 20,000, the alleged value of the services and companionship of Hurley's wife, who it was alleged, "was killed through the carelessness and negligence of appellee's servants", and "by the wrongful act, neglect or default of appellee."
While the suit was pending, Hurley died, and it was sought to revive the cause in the name of appellant as his executor. The court, instead, abated the action, and this appeal is prosecuted from a judgment dismissing the cause.
Judgment affirmed.
Stuckey & Stuckey, for appellant.
1. The cause of action survives per force of the Constitution. Art 5, § 31. It also survives by reason of the statutes. Kirby's Dig. § § 6285, 6286, 6288, 6298; 18 Mo 162; 186 Mo. 445; 164 N.Y. 145; 23 Ky. 1879; 17 Pa.Super.Ct. 151; 63 N.J.L. 558; 75 N.Y. 192; 83 N.Y. 595; 58 Fed 532.
2. This being an action unknown to the common law, and based Upon a statute only, the maxim, "Actio personalis moritur cure persona" can have no application.
T. M. Mehaffy and J. E. Williams, for appellee.
All questions involved in this action have been settled by this court contrary to the contention of appellant in Davis v. Nichols, 54 Ark. 358. See, also, 53 Ark. 117;51 N.H. 71; 70 Md. 319; 19 N.Y. 252; 61 N.E. 221; 29 S.W. 370; 23 Wis. 400; 50 La. An. 477; 111 F. 708; 49 Am. & Eng. R. Cas. 495; 151 U.S. 673; 28 S.E. 662; 46 S.W. 63; 74 N.W. 797; 75 S.W. 868; 23 So. 100.
OPINIONWOOD, J., (after stating the facts.)
The only question is: "did the cause of action survive the death of Hurley?" The action is based upon section 6288 of Kirby's Digest as follows: "When a wife be killed in this State by the wrongful act, neglect or default of any person, company or corporation, the husband may have a cause of action therefor against such wrongdoer, and be entitled to damages for the services and companionship of his said wife in whatever amount the jury trying the cause may consider he is entitled to; provided, suit be brought within two years from the time the said cause of action occurs, which action may be brought by and in the name of the husband."
The statute under which survival to the executor of Hurley is sought reads as follows: Sec. 6285. "For wrongs done to the person or property of another an action may be maintained against the wrongdoers, and such action may be brought by the person injured, or, after his death, by his executor or administrator against such wrongdoer, or, after his death, against his executor or administrator, in the same manner and with like effect in all respects as actions founded on contract."
To establish a survival under this section, it must be held that the killing of the wife of Hurley was an injury to the person or property of Hurley himself. Such is the contention of appellant; but the case of Davis v. Nichols, 54 Ark. 358, 15 S.W. 880, decides directly to the contrary. Judge COCKRILL, rendering the court's opinion, said: "The 'injury to the person' mentioned in the provision has been construed to mean a bodily injury or damage of a physical character, and no other; and the injury to property, so far as it relates to personal property, is only such as was contemplated by the statute of 4 Edward III, c. 7, on the same subject."
It would be absurd to hold that the death of the wife would be a physical injury to the person of the husband, and the case and the authorities cited show that such rights as arise out of the domestic relation are not "property," in the meaning of tile statute. The domestic services of a wife, and her...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Butler County Railroad Co. v. Lawrence
... ... 340 158 Ark. 271 BUTLER COUNTY RAILROAD COMPANY v. LAWRENCE No. 302Supreme Court of ... ...
-
Pickens-Bond Const. Co. v. Case
... ... employment by Pickens-Bond Construction Company. The original injury occurred on or about ... St. Louis S. W. Ry. Co. v. Braswell, 198 Ark. 143, 127 ... 334, 172 S.W. 885; Billingsley v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co., 84 Ark. 617, ... ...
-
Reed v. Real Detective Publishing Company, Inc.
... ... 533, 90 A. 799; ... Billingsley v. St. Louis, I. M. & S. R ... Co., 84 Ark ... ...
- Hughes v. Kelley