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

• Court: Supreme Court of Alabama
• Writing for the Court: WEAKLEY, C.J.
• Citation: 40 So. 385,146 Ala. 267
• Parties: BIRMINGHAM RY., LIGHT & POWER CO. v. ADAMS. a1
• Decision Date: 03 April 1906

40 So. 385

146 Ala. 267

BIRMINGHAM RY., LIGHT & POWER CO.
v.
ADAMS. a1

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 3, 1906

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; A. A. Coleman, Judge.

"To be officially reported."

Action by Jesse L. Adams against the Birmingham Ralway, Light & Power Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

This was an action for damages resulting to a passenger from a collision of defendant's car with a train of cars on the Louisville & Nashville Railroad through the negligence of defendant's servants or agents in charge of the car on which plaintiff was a passenger. The first and second count alleges in substance the relation of carrier and passenger, the payment of fare by passenger, the collision between the car on which plaintiff was a passenger and the train of cars on the Louisville & Nashville Railroad where the lines on grade, and the negligence of the servants or agents of the corporation in charge of the car, the proximate consequence of which resulted in the injury of the plaintiff. Count A was in the following words: "Plaintiff claims of the defendant, a body corporate doing business in Jefferson county, state of Alabama, $25,000 damages, for that on, to wit, February 3, 1904, plaintiff, while a passenger upon defendant's railway, at or near a station known as the 'L. & N. Crossing,' between Birmingham and Gate City, in the county and state aforesaid, was injured as follows: Plaintiff was bruised and mashed, shocked, and otherwise injured about his face, back, legs, head, stomach, eyes, and other parts of his person. His back was wrenched and sprained. He was scarred, crippled, and disfigured. His right eyesight was permanently impaired. His nervous system was wrecked, thereby causing plaintiff to endure very great mental and physical pain and suffering, and permanently rendering plaintiff less able to earn a livelihood. Plaintiff avers said injuries to have been proximately caused by the negligence of the defendant's servants in and about the carriage of the plaintiff as a passenger of the defendant." Count B is similar in all respects to A, except that it counts on the willful, wanton, or intentional negligence of defendant's servants.

Tillman, Grub, Bradley & Morrow, for appellant.

Denson & Denson, for appellee.

WEAKLEY, C.J.

There is no bill of exceptions in the record, and the appeal is prosecuted to review rulings on demurrer to the four counts of the complaint. No argument or citation of authority is necessary to demonstrate that the demurrers to counts 1 and 2 were properly overruled. The important and controlling question arises upon count A, added by amendment. Count B is identical with the former in its essential averments, except that, instead of simple negligence, it charges willful, wanton, or intentional misconduct, and the principles to be announced with reference to count A will also apply to count B.

Many grounds of demurrer were assigned, but the only ones we deem it necessary to discuss, although all have been considered, are the following: (1) It does...