Calvert v. Des Moines City Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 14 December 1918 |
| Docket Number | No. 32172.,32172. |
| Citation | 184 Iowa 1238,169 N.W. 641 |
| Parties | CALVERT v. DES MOINES CITY RY. CO. |
| Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from District Court, Polk County; Hubert Utterback, Judge.
Action to recover damages claimed to have been caused by plaintiff's dress skirt catching upon a defective bar or obstruction on the floor of one of defendant's cars while she was engaged in alighting therefrom. At the close of plaintiff's evidence, there was a directed verdict in favor of the defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.Wm. G. Clark and F. L. Groesbeck, both of Des Moines, for appellant.
W. H. McHenry, of Des Moines, for appellee.
Plaintiff was injured while attempting to alight from one of defendant's cars. In describing the accident, plaintiff testified:
“At the point of getting off I rung a bell. The car stopped at the usual place. Conductor opened the door and stood, and when I went to step off, and as I put my foot down to the step, it seemed like my dress caught tight around my ankle as I was going to put my foot down, and it held me back for a minute, and then it seemed to loosen quick and pitched me forward off the platform onto the ground.
Q. What did the dress catch on, if you know? A. On the plate coming out of the car door. There is an iron bar, or something goes along there. I hadn't got hold of the handhold yet. I was about to take hold of it, but had not got hold yet. I was about to take hold of it, but had not got hold of it. At the time I first felt my skirt caught, I was going to step off the platform, off the step. My skirt caught around my left ankle. That is, the foot I was putting out to step onto the step, and then, of course, it was caught tight around my ankle for just a minute or second, and then I pitched forward. I was in motion to get onto the step. Exhibit A is the dress skirt that I wore at the time the accident happened to me. The opening where the hooks are came on the side as I was wearing the dress. The tear or rent in the back was made at the time; that is what threw me off. That is where it caught.”
Upon cross-examination, she testified that she glanced back over her shoulder and saw that her skirt was caught on something; but, when pressed to state upon what it was caught, she apparently was unable to do so. She admitted that she did not see a nail or screw projecting above the car step or floor, and could not tell more definitely than appears from the above statement upon what her skirt caught. Her testimony in chief was very much weakened by the cross-examination, but we are not inclined to hold that it did not present a question of fact for the jury. If there was no defect in the car, defendant was in a position to prove that fact. While it was suggested by counsel for appellee, when cross-examining plaintiff, that some one may have stepped, or stood, upon her skirt, plaintiff did not so testify. Many cases are cited and reviewed by counsel, but...
To continue reading
Request your trial