Dawkins v. Columbia Electric St. Ry., Light & Power Co.

• Citation: 63 S.E. 746,82 S.C. 166
• Parties: DAWKINS v. COLUMBIA ELECTRIC ST. RY., LIGHT & POWER CO. et al. (two cases).
• Decision Date: 01 March 1909
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

63 S.E. 746

82 S.C. 166

DAWKINS v. COLUMBIA ELECTRIC ST. RY., LIGHT & POWER CO. et al. (two cases).

Supreme Court of South Carolina

March 1, 1909

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Richland County; Ernest Gary, Judge.

Separate actions by Anthony Dawkins and Mack Dawkins against the Columbia Electric Street Railway, Light & Power Company and the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. From an order requiring the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company to make its answer more definite and certain, it appeals . Appeal dismissed.

W. H Lyles and Willcox & Willcox, for appellant.

B. F Townsend and Frank G. Tompkins, for respondents.

GARY A. J.

These two actions were heard together, and the appeals involve the same question. The complaints allege that the plaintiffs were passengers on a car of the defendant the Columbia Electric Street Railway, Light & Power Company, and were injured as the result of a collision with a train of cars on the track of the defendant Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. The allegations of the complaint relative to the giving of signals and exercising precautions are as follows: "That said injuries, as aforesaid, were caused to the plaintiff, as he is informed and believes, by the mismanagement carelessness, negligence, recklessness, willfulness, and wantonness of the defendant Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company in the following respects: (a) In that said Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company, its agents and servants failed to sound the whistle, or to ring the bell of said engine at a distance of 500 yards from the point its said track crosses said Gervais street, which is a public highway, and to continue ringing said bell, or sounding said whistle, until said engine had crossed said street, as required by the laws of this state; (b) in that said engine, car, or train of cars being at a standstill within a less distance than 100 rods from said crossing of Gervais street, the said defendant, its agents, and servants failed to ring the bell or sound the whistle at least 30 seconds before such engine car, or train of cars were moved, and to continue such ringing or sounding until said street was crossed, as required by the laws of this state; (c) in that said defendant, its agents, and servants failed and neglected to bring said train to a stop before crossing the track of said street railway company, as required by the laws of this state; (d) in that no brakeman was stationed at the last car of said train, and said car was not equipped with good and sufficient brakes, as required by the laws of this state; (e) in that said defendant, its agents and servants, ran said engine, car, or train of cars upon and across said Gervais street without any warning, and failed to have any flagman watchman, or other means or person to guard and direct said...