Crandall v. Minneapolis, St. P. & S. S. M. Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 15 December 1905
• Citation: 105 N.W. 185,96 Minn. 434
• Parties: CRANDALL v. MINNEAPOLIS, ST. P. & S. S. M. RY. CO.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

96 Minn. 434

105 N.W. 185

CRANDALL

v.MINNEAPOLIS, ST. P. & S. S. M. RY. CO.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Dec. 15, 1905.

Appeal from District Court, Ramsey County; Oscar Hallam, Judge.

Action by Henry Crandall against the Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

Action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the alleged negligence of the defendant in failing to keep the vestibule doors at the rear of its sleeping car closed between stations. Held:

1. The defendant was not bound to have the car vestibuled; but, having done so, it could not lead passengers to believe that the doors of the vestibule would be kept closed between stations, and then negligently leave them open, without incurring liability to a passenger injured thereby.

2. Evidence herein is sufficient to sustain the verdict to the effect that the defendant was thus negligent. A. H. Bright and Munn & Thygeson, for appellant.

Giantvalley & Doyle, for respondent.

START, C. J.

This action was brought to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the minor son of the plaintiff by reason of the alleged negligence of the defendant, in that the vestibule doors at the rear end of its train were left open between stations for an unnecessary length of time. Verdict for plaintiff in the sum of $1,000. The defendant made a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, which was denied. Judgment on the verdict, and the defendant appealed from the judgment.

The sole question presented by the record is whether the evidence entitled the defendant to a directed verdict in its favor, for the reason that there was no evidence of negligence on its part. The record discloses evidence tending to show: That the boy, who was only seven years old, was a passenger in the care of his aunt on a regular passenger train from Boston to Minneapolis, which passed over the defendant's railway line from Sault Ste. Marie, Mich. (hereafter referred to as the Soo), to its destination; that they occupied a sleeper, which was the rear car in the train; that the rear platform of the car was vestibuled, with a door on each side thereof and a railing at the rear; that when the doors were opened the rear platform was substantially the same as the platform of an ordinary passenger car, but when they were closed the vestibule was a safe place for passengers to ride in; that on this car the doors of...