Clark v. Smith

• Decision Date: 03 March 1900
• Court: Vermont Supreme Court
• Parties: CLARK v. SMITH et al.

47 A. 391

72 Vt. 138

CLARK

v. SMITH et al.

Supreme Court of Vermont. Bennington.

March 3, 1900.

Exceptions from Bennington county court Action by Reuben Clark, administrator of Sarah Clark's estate, against E. C. Smith and Charles M. Hays, receivers of the Central Vermont Railroad Company, to recover for the death of intestate. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants except. Reversed.

Argued before TAFT, C. J., and ROWELL, TYLER, START, THOMPSON, and WATSON, JJ.

F. C. Archibald and Barber & Darling, for plaintiff.

Chas. M. Wilds and H. C. Royce, for defendants.

TAFT, C. J. The plaintiff claimed that his intestate was a passenger on the defendant's train from Brattleboro to Londonderry; that when the train reached Jamaica orders were given for the passengers to change cars; that the intestate arose from her seat for that purpose, and stood in or near the door of the car; that the train had stopped, and was then so suddenly started and again stopped that in consequence she was thrown through the door to the ground, and so injured that she died two days after. The testimony of all the witnesses tended to show that the train had stopped at the time of the accident; that it had come to a standstill before the decedent started to leave the car. The testimony of the plaintiff's witnesses tended to show that the train, after stopping, was suddenly started; that, as the witnesses described it they (the trainmen) gave a "yank" to the train. One of the witnesses described it as a "jolt," and another as a "slight snap," and that the train went four or five feet, and then stopped. One witness said the train started, and gave a sudden stop, and the decedent fell out of the door. One of the witnesses testified that when the train had come to a standstill the decedent "had got up first, and stepped over the bench, and got to the door, as the car gave a jolt and threw her out of the door." The testimony of the defendants tended to show that after the train came to a standstill there was no movement of the train until after the passengers went out of the car which they intended to and did leave at the Jamaica station, and that the decedent fell in attempting to go out of the car when the car was not in motion. In this situation of the case, testimony was admitted to show how the train was handled on the way from Brattleboro to Jamaica, and that the train was jerked violently at other stations, for the purpose of characterizing the way the trainmen were handling...