Ennis v. Yazoo & M.V.R. Co.
| Decision Date | 13 May 1918 |
| Docket Number | 20036 |
| Citation | 118 Miss. 509,79 So. 73 |
| Parties | ENNIS v. YAZOO & M. V. R. CO |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the circuit court of Amite county, HON. R. E. JACKSON Judge.
Suit by Mrs. E. A. Ennis administratrix of the estate of John W Ennis, deceased against the Yazoo & Mississippi Valley Railroad Company. From a judgment for plaintiff on a second trial and a denial of her motion for a new trial, and from the judgment setting aside the verdict on the first trial plaintiff appeals.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Judgment reversed.
A. H. Longino and Robt. B. Ricketts, for appellant.
Robt. B. Mayes, Chas. N. Burch and H. D. Minor, for appellee.
The appellant, Mrs. E. A. Ennis, administratrix of the estate of her deceased son, John W. Ennis, filed suit and recovered judgment against the appellee railway company for the sum of thirteen thousand dollars as damages for the death of her son, alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the appellee in furnishing a defective and dangerous electric wire appliance to the deceased for use in his employment, which shocked him to death. The verdict and judgment for thirteen thousand dollars on motion for a new trial, was set aside, and a new trial granted the defendant railroad in the lower court. On the second trial of the case the plaintiff below recovered damages in the sum of five thousand dollars, whereupon she moved the court to set aside this verdict and grant a new trial because the court had erroneously limited the measure of damages to an amount recoverable under the federal Employers' Liability Act (Act Cong. April 22, 1908, chapter 149, 35 Stat. 65 [U. S. Comp. St. 1916, sections 8657-8665]), and from a judgment overruling this motion for a new trial, and from the judgment setting aside the former verdict of thirteen thousand dollars and granting a new trial to defendant, plaintiff below appeals here.
The appeal presents two questions for our decision: First, whether or not the lower court erred in setting aside the first verdict for thirteen thousand dollars and granting a new trial to the defendant railroad company, or, in other words, whether this court should now reinstate the former verdict and judgment for thirteen thousand dollars in favor of the appellant; second, that if the court below was correct in setting aside the thirteen thousand dollar verdict and granting a new trial to appellee railroad company, then whether or not the lower court erred in limiting the recovery of damages in the second trial to the measure provided by the federal Employers' Liability Act.
The verdict and judgment in the first trial was based upon and mainly supported by the testimony of one witness named Boswell, who testified for the plaintiff that he was employed in the shops of the appellee railroad in Vicksburg at the time and where the deceased John Ennis met his death; that young Ennis was employed as a boiler maker's helper in the shops, and at the time he came to his death was assisting one Mr. Desmond, a boiler maker, repair the inside of a fire box of a locomotive by putting certain bolts therein; that he was holding in his hand an electric light connected by an extension cord furnished by the appellee, and was holding this light in such a way that the boiler maker could see how to do his work in the fire box. The light was attached to a long cord, and the glass bulb was covered by a wire guard over it; that this guard on the lamp was defective and out of order, and would slip and come in contact with the electrically charged part of the lamp; that, while the deceased, Ennis, was thus engaged in the duties of his employment in holding the light for the boiler maker, he suddenly fell down on the deck of the engine or tank, where he was standing, and exclaimed, "My God, the light's got me!" and died within a few minutes thereafter, still clinging to the electric cord and light. The witness Boswell testified at length that he worked near by and had used this particular light and cord on several occasions previously and that he had been electrically shocked while using it as many as six or eight different times, which, he said, was on account of the defective condition of the cord and light, and that he had several times within the previous week reported the dangerous and defective condition of this electric appliance to the boiler maker, Desmond, and also to the foreman, Derrick, who was in charge of the shop, and asked the foreman, who was a superior officer over the employees, to have this particular light repaired or replaced with a safe one, but that the foreman, notwithstanding this notice, continued to furnish the unsafe appliance to the employees until it caused the death of young Ennis, whereupon the railroad company then replaced the unsafe appliance by furnishing a new one. There is other testimony in the record tending to show that the cord and light used by the deceased, Ennis, was in a defective condition, and that it carried a voltage of sufficient strength under certain conditions to cause the death of a person. It appears from the record that at the time of the shock and death of the deceased, Ennis, the employees who gathered around his body were of the opinion that he met his death by electrocution from the electric light and cord. No other cause of death appeared to any one. The superintendent of the railroad telegraphed to the mother of the deceased that her son...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kozar v. Chesapeake and Ohio Railway Company
...cases which discussed punitive damages under this act: Cain v. Southern Ry. Co., 199 F. 211 (C.C.E.D.Tenn.1911); Ennis v. Yazoo & M. V. Ry. Co., 118 Miss. 509, 79 So. 73 (1918); Helsel v. Pennsylvania R. Co., 84 F.Supp. 296 (E.D.N.Y.1949); Missouri-K-T R. Co. of Texas v. Ridgway, 191 F.2d 3......
-
Aetna Ins. Co. v. Singleton
... ... Queen ... Ins. Co. v. Betbeze, 53 So. 592, 98 Miss. 262; ... Ennis v. Y. & M. V. Ry. Co., 79 So. 73, 118 Miss ... 509; Hattiesburg Coca Cola Bottling Co. v. Price, ... ...
-
Tanner v. Walsh
...Barney v. Scherling, 40 Miss. 320; Quin v. Myles, 59 Miss. 375; McCarty v. Mitchell, 151 So. 567, 169 Miss. 82; Ennis v. Y. & M. V. R. R. Co., 118 Miss. 509, 79 So. 73. Honorable Court, in request for additional briefs in this cause, will note that no objection had been made in the court be......
-
Petition of Den Norske Amerikalinje A/S
...survival of the decedent's right of action, includes punitive damages in the case of death. Claimants have cited Ennis v. Yazoo & M. V. Ry. Co., 118 Miss. 509, 79 So. 73 (1918) for the proposition that exemplary damages may be recovered in a death action instituted under the Federal Employe......