Birmingham Ry., Light & Power Co. v. Nolan

• Decision Date: 28 June 1902
• Parties: BIRMINGHAM RY., LIGHT & POWER CO. v. NOLAN.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

32 So. 715

134 Ala. 329

BIRMINGHAM RY., LIGHT & POWER CO. v. NOLAN.

Supreme Court of Alabama

June 28, 1902

Appeal from city court of Bessemer; B. C. Jones, Judge.

Action by Mrs. Alpho Nolan against the Birmingham Railway, Light &amp Power Company. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant appeals. Affirmed.

This action was brought to recover damages sustained by the plaintiff as the result of being carried beyond the destination while riding on one of the defendant's electric cars and being put off at another station and in failing and refusing to put the plaintiff off where she had notified the conductor she wanted to get off. There were verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, assessing her damages at $150.

Walker Tillman, Campbell & Porter, for appellant.

Estes &amp Smith, for appellee.

HARALSON J.

The complaint contained besides counts for simple negligence, one for having recklessly, willfully or wantonly, refused to put plaintiff off at Twenty-Fifth street in Bessemer, to which point she had paid her fare, and where the conductor, at the time she paid it to him, agreed to put her off. The case was tried on the plea of the general issue.

The proof, on plaintiff's part, tended to show, that she paid the conductor her fare to her destination,--Twenty-Fifth street,--and when she paid it, she told him that she desired to get off at that street, and he said "All right;" that the train did not stop to let her off, when it reached her destination, but the bell cord was pulled by a gentleman for plaintiff, which attracted the attention of the conductor, who was told that the plaintiff desired to get off, and he replied, that "the train does not stop at 25th street, and the lady will have to go to the next station," and, thereupon, he gave the signal to the engineer to go ahead, which he did, and plaintiff was carried to Woodward's crossing,--about three-quarters of a mile from Twenty-Fifth street,--where she got off and had to walk back; that it was windy and cold, and the ground wet and sloppy from snow that had fallen; that she got her feet wet and was taken sick, and had been sick nearly ever since, and that she required the attention of a physician, who paid her several visits.

The evidence of the defendant tended to show, that the conductor did not undertake to put plaintiff off at Twenty-Fifth street, when she paid him her fare, and that he was not guilty of reckless or wanton conduct in the matter;...