Dougherty v. Davis

Decision Date01 April 1922
Citation48 N.D. 883,187 N.W. 616
PartiesDOUGHERTY v. DAVIS, Special Agent.
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Syllabus by the Court.

A railway company owes a duty, not only to passengers, but also to those who come to meet incoming or accompany departing passengers, to keep its station platform reasonably clear and free from obstacles by which such persons are liable to be injured.

A person engaged in the business of transporting passengers and their baggage between two depots situated upon two different lines of railway in the same village, and who has been so engaged for a considerable period of time with the knowledge and acquiescence of the carrier, is an invitee upon the station premises, and the carrier owes him a duty to use reasonable care for his safety.

In the instant case, it is held, that the implied invitation extended by the carrier to the person engaged in such transportation business extended, not only to the particular premises where his bus was generally placed near the depot platform, but also to the waiting rooms in the depot and to the station platform.

Questions of negligence and proximate cause are generally questions of fact for the jury. They become questions of law only when the evidence is such that different minds cannot reasonably draw different conclusions either as to the facts or the deductions to be drawn from the facts.

Appeal from District Court, Richland County; Allen, Judge.

Action by R. W. Dougherty against James Cox Davis, Special Agent of the President. Judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded for new trial.

J. A. Slattery, W. E. Purcell, and W. S. Lauder, all of Wahpeton, for appellant.

Ed. L. Grantham, of Aberdeen, S. D., and Young, Conmy & Young, of Fargo, for respondent.

CHRISTIANSON, J.

This is an action to recover damages for personal injuries sustained by the plaintiff at the station of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company in Fairmount, Richland county, in this state. The injuries were sustained on the evening of January 31, 1920, and were occasioned by one of the passenger coaches on a south-bound passenger train operated by the defendant colliding with a sled which was standing on the station platform at Fairmount, causing said sled to be thrown against the plaintiff. The plaintiff, at the time of the injury, was, and for a long time prior thereto had been, engaged in the bus, baggage, and transfer business at Fairmount, N. D. And as so engaged he met daily all the passenger trains arriving at and departing from the said Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company's station at said place. About 9 o'clock on the evening in question, and at a time when a passenger train of the defendant was due and expected to come into said town from the north and stop at the station for the purpose of letting off and taking on passengers and unloading and loading baggage and expressage, the plaintiff was upon said depot platform. There was a sled to which a team of horses were hitched on the platform. This rig had been driven onto the platform by one Schafer, who was then an employee of the American Express Company. Schafer and his said rig were on the platform for the purpose of delivering express matter to or receiving the same from the express and baggage coach of said passenger train, which train was then expected to arrive, and which collided with said sled. There was also on the sled at the time some baggage which had been taken from the regular baggage truck of the defendant, which baggage it was the duty of the defendant to deliver into the baggage coach of said passenger train. After the accident this baggage was delivered by the railroad employees into said baggage coach from the sled. On the night of the accident there was a snowstorm and there were some snowdrifts on the depot platform. The accident occurred at the north end of the station.

The evidence shows that the railroad track runs north and south, and that the depot is situated on the east side of the track. The depot platform is about 24 feet long. There is a bay window about 15 feet long which projects about 3 feet from the wall. There is a distance of about 13 feet from the bay window to the edge of the platform. There are two waiting rooms. The ladies' waiting room is the northerly room in the depot. The men's waiting room is south of the office, and the freight room is immediately south of that. A few minutes before the train came in, plaintiff drove his bus to its accustomed place, a point about 25 or 30 feet south of the depot. He left his bus and went into the ladies' waiting room. At that time there was no team or sled on the platform. He remained in the waiting room a little while, until he heard the train coming; he then stepped outside the door, and was returning to his bus at the south end of the platform when he was struck by the sled. The railway company furnished its employees at the depot with a truck operated by hand with which to transfer baggage from the baggage room in the depot to the baggage car and from the baggage car back to the baggage room in the depot. When there was snow on the depot platform, it was difficult, if not impossible, to operate this truck; and on such occasions Schafer would put the baggage on his sled and transfer it from the baggage room to the baggage car and vice versa. As already stated, on the evening of the accident Schafer had put the baggage on his sled; it was on the sled at the time the accident occurred; and, after the accident, the employees of the defendant took the baggage from the sled and put it into the baggage car. Schafer testified that he merely hauled the baggage for the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
22 cases
  • Ziegler v. Ford Motor Company, a Corp.
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • February 25, 1937
    ...other inference can fairly and reasonably be drawn therefrom. Haugo v. Great Northern R. Co. 27 N.D. 268, 145 N.W. 1053; Dougherty v. Davis, 48 N.D. 883, 187 N.W. 616; Billingsley v. McCormick Transfer Co. 58 N.D. 913, 228 424. A hard and fast practical rule in reference to the blowing of a......
  • Lindenberg v. Folson
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • November 30, 1965
    ...72 N.D. 310, 6 N.W.2d 576; Logan v. Schjeldahl, 66 N.D. 152, 262 N.W. 463; Newton v. Gretter, 60 N.D. 635, 236 N.W. 254; Dougherty v. Davis, 48 N.D. 883, 187 N.W. 616; McGregor v. Great Northern Railway Co., 31 N.D. 471, 154 N.W. Upon review of an order denying a motion for judgment notwith......
  • Newton v. Gretter
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • April 15, 1931
    ...other inference can fairly and reasonably be drawn therefrom. Haugo v. Great Northern R. Co. 27 N.D. 268, 145 N.W. 1053; Dougherty v. Davis, 48 N.D. 883, 187 N.W. 616; Ferm v. Great Northern R. Co. 53 N.D. 543, 207 39; Axelson v. Jardine, 57 N.D. 524, 223 N.W. 32; Schulkey v. Brown, 59 N.D.......
  • Newton v. Gretter
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • April 15, 1931
    ...no other inference can fairly and reasonably be drawn therefrom. Haugo v. G. N. R. R. Co., 27 N. D. 268, 145 N. W. 1053;Dougherty v. Davis, 48 N. D. 883, 187 N. W. 616;Ferm v. G. N. R. R. Co., 53 N D. 543, 207 N. W. 39;Axelson v. Jardine et al., 57 N. D. 524, 223 N. W. 32;Schulkey v. Brown,......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT