Butler v. Southern Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 26 March 1912 |
| Citation | Butler v. Southern Ry. Co., 63 Fla. 95, 58 So. 225 (Fla. 1912) |
| Parties | BUTLER et al. v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Duval County; R. M. Call, Judge.
Action by Bessie Butler and others against the Southern Railway Company.Judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error.Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
In an action for injuries received by the operation of a train of a railroad company, it is in general sufficient to allege ultimate facts showing that the defendant negligently did or omitted the act or acts that proximately caused or contributed to causing the injury as stated; the specific fact that actually caused the injury being duly alleged so that a definite issue may be presented for trial.
While a railroad company is not held to as high a degree of care to prevent injury to trespassers as is required by law in the case of passengers, employés, and licensees, yet under the statute, where injury by the operation of the train of a railroad company is shown, there is liability of the defendant for damages unless the railroad company shall make it appear that it had exercised all ordinary and reasonable care and diligence to avoid the injury.What was ordinary and reasonable care and diligence depends upon all the circumstances of the case.If the injured person was in fact a trespasser, it may be shown in evidence as a factor to be considered in determining the degree of care required of the defendant.
COUNSELGeo. C. Bedell, of Jacksonville, for plaintiffs in error.
E. J L'Engle, of Jacksonville, for defendant in error.
Charles Butler is alleged to have been killed by a train of the Southern Railway Company, and this action, begun August 26, 1908, in the circuit court for Duval county, is in the name of his minor children by next friend under the statute to recover such damages as they may have sustained by the death of their father.Seesection 3145 of the General Statutesandsection 3146chapter 5648, Acts of 1907.
The declaration is in three counts, as follows:
'Wherefore, plaintiffs bring this their suit, and claim $10,000 damages from the defendant.
'Wherefore, plaintiffs bring this their suit, and claim $10,000 damages from the defendant.
...
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeStart Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant
-
Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database
-
Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength
-
Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities
-
Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting
Start Your Free Trial
-
Cline v. Powell
... ... 427, 428; Ballas v. Lake Weir Light etc. Co., 100 ... Fla. 913, 130 So. 421; Warner v. Goding, 91 Fla ... 260, 107 So. 406. See also Butler v. Southern R ... Co., 63 Fla. 95, 58 So. 225 ... [192 So. 631] ... However, ... in Rayam v. A. C. L. R. Co., 119 Fla. 386, 161 So ... ...
-
Director General of Railroads v. Into
... ... R. Co. v. Pipkin, 64 Fla. 24, 59 So. 564; Florida ... East Coast R. Co. v. Carter, 67 Fla. 335, 65 So. 254, ... Ann. Cas. 1916E, 1299; Butler v. Southern R. Co., 63 ... Fla. 95, 58 So. 225. See, also, Hammond v. Jacksonville ... Electric Co., 66 Fla. 145, 63 So. 709, and Johnson ... v ... ...
-
Georgia, F. & A. Ry. Co. v. Cox
...predicated upon the theory that the deceased was a trespasser we need only quote from the opinion of this court in the case of Butler v. Southern R. Co., supra: if the decedent was a mere trespasser, it is alleged that he was fatally injured by the negligence of the defendant in the operati......
-
Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. Branham
...cars unless the company shall make it clear that their agents have exercised reasonable care under the circumstances. Butler v. Southern Ry. Co., 63 Fla. 95, 58 So. 225; Marianna & B. R. Co. v. May, 83 Fla. 524, 91 So. 553. In view of the testimony before the court that no warning of the ba......