Clanton v. Southern Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 03 February 1910
• Citation: 165 Ala. 485,51 So. 616
• Parties: CLANTON v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

51 So. 616

165 Ala. 485

CLANTON v. SOUTHERN RY. CO. ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

February 3, 1910

Appeal from Law and Equity Court, Madison County; Tancred Betts Judge.

Action by Juliet Clanton against the Southern Railway Company and another. From a judgment for defendants, on sustaining a demurrer to each count of the complaint, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

The complaint was as follows:

"(1) Plaintiff claims of the defendants the sum of $25,000 damages, for this: That on, to wit, the 30th day of September, 1907, the defendant the Southern Railway Company, a corporation under the laws of the state of Virginia, was operating a train of cars, as a common carrier of passengers for hire, from Salisbury in the state of North Carolina, to Huntsville, in the state of Alabama and the defendant the Pullman Company, a corporation, was at that time and place likewise engaged in operating a car which was a part of the train of the defendant Southern Railway Company, between said Salisbury, N. C., and Huntsville, Ala. Having purchased a berth upon said car of said Pullman Company, that on said day plaintiff was a passenger on said Southern Railway Company, and in the car of the said Pullman Company, having boarded said train and said car at Salisbury, about 9 p. m. And plaintiff avers that when she entered said car all the berths had been made down, and said car was hot and disagreeable; and plaintiff avers that she stepped upon the rear platform of said car, and in so stepping upon said rear vestibule of said car, which was a vestibuled car end, while said car was standing in the station at Salisbury, she slipped and fell down the steps of said car to the ground, several feet below, and was greatly bruised and injured, in this: [Here follows description of injuries and claims for special damages.] And plaintiff avers that said injury was caused by reason of the negligence of the defendants, their servants, agents, or employés, in failing to keep said rear vestibule properly lighted, so as to render the same safe for the use of plaintiff and other passengers on said train or car, to plaintiff's damage."

(2) Claims same damages as 1, alleges the relation of passenger and carrier, and further alleges that while upon said train in said cars, and while said train and car were not in motion, but were standing at the station in Salisbury, the plaintiff went upon the rear platform of said car, which car was a vestibuled car, having at its rear end platforms to cover the steps leading into said car, and railings or doors to inclose the same, so as to render it a safe place for passengers to go on said car, and at the time plaintiff went upon said platform it was dark, and plaintiff fell down the steps, greatly injuring, etc. It is averred that her injury was caused by the negligence of the defendants, their servants, agents, or employés, in charge of said train, or said car, in this: That there was a door over said step, which, when down, formed a continuation of said platform, and plaintiff avers that said door over said step was raised, which fact was unknown to plaintiff, leaving said steps open and exposed, thereby causing plaintiff to fall.

(3) Same as 2, with the additional allegation that the door was negligently opened or raised, or permitted to be raised and opened, without providing suitable lights to enable plaintiff and other passengers to know and be informed that said door was raised or open, without the knowledge of the plaintiff that said door was raised or opened.

(4) Is a short statement of the facts alleged in count 3.

(5) Alleges the same facts as in the other counts, with the additional allegation that the car was a vestibuled car, with a platform at its rear which was commonly known as an "observation platform," and that it had doors covering the steps leading into said car, which, when down, formed a continuation of such platform, with a railing inclosing the same, so as to make it safe for passengers upon said car to go thereon; and plaintiff avers that passengers were accustomed to go upon said platform at their will, both while said trains were standing at the station and while in motion, which custom was known to the defendants. Then follow the allegations of the negligence as alleged in the other counts.

Brickell & Smith, for appellant.

Almon & Andrews, for appellee Southern Railway Company. Cooper & Cooper and Campbell & Johnston, for appellee Pullman Car Company.

SAYRE J.

It is negligence, except under special circumstances, to stand upon the platform of a car of a rapidly moving commercial railroad train. The...