Farish v. Canton Flying Services

Decision Date19 May 1952
Docket NumberNo. 38244,38244
Citation58 So.2d 915,214 Miss. 370
PartiesFARISH et al. v. CANTON FLYING SERVICES, Inc.
CourtMississippi Supreme Court

214 Miss. 371] Satterfield, Ewing, Williams & Shell and John S. Holmes, Jackson, for appellants.

Watkins & Eager, Jackson, Ray, Spivey & Cain, Canton, for appellee.

LEE, Justice.

Mrs. Susie C. Farish, widow, and Bettie Carol and Larry Donald Farish, minor children, instituted their suit against Canton Flying Services, Incorporated, to recover damages for the alleged negligent death of their husband and father, L. D. Farish. At the close of the evidence for the plaintiffs the court sustained a motion to exclude and to direct a verdict for the defendant. From the judgment entered thereon, the plaintiffs appeal.

The appellee qualified with the Veterans Administration, and was authorized to instruct and train veterans to become private and commercial pilots. Farish entered training and, in due course, obtained a license as a private pilot. He then decided to continue his training for the purpose of acquiring a license as a commercial pilot. While so doing, on October 24, 1947, his plane crashed, and he received injuries from which he died several days later. The declaration charged several grounds of negligence, namely, (1) failure of appellee to supply the plane with enough gasoline for the flight and to place a cap on the tank to retain the gasoline; (2) insufficient training of Farish to fly the Ryan plane in which he was injured; and (3) allowing a small boy to ride in the plane as a passenger.

Before recapitulating the evidence to determine whether or not it made out a case as against a peremptory, it must be kept in mind that such 'evidence must be treated as proving every fact favorable to plaintiff's case which is established either directly or by reasonable inference.' Johnston v. Canton Flying Services, Inc., 209 Miss. 226, 46 So.2d 533, 535; Bankston v. Dumont, 205 Miss. 272, 38 So.2d 721; Kurn v. Fondren, 189 Miss. 739, 198 So. 727; Stricklin v. Harvey, 181 Miss. 606, 179 So. 345; Dean v. Brannon, 139 Miss. 312, 104 So. 173.

It is also necessary to keep in mind the general principle that actionable negligence may be proved by circumstances. In Johnston v. Canton Flying Services, Inc., supra, [209 Miss. 226, 46 So.2d 535.] it was said that 'negligence may be established by circumstantial evidence in the absence of testimony by eyewitnesses provided the circumstances are such as to take the case out of the realm of conjecture and place it within the field of legitimate inference, and further in this connection that the causal connection between an agency and the injury sustained need not be shown by direct evidence.' See also Palmer v. Clarksdale Hospital, 206 Miss. 680, 40 So.2d 582; 38 Am.Jur., Negligence, par, 333, p. 1032.

With these general principles as the straightedge, we proceed to a statement of the facts and their measurement, along with the logical inferences therefrom.

Farish's flight record showed that he had 14 hours and 50 minutes of dual control, that is, flying with an instructor, before he soloed. Thereafter over a given period, he had 2 hours additional of dual against 55 hours and 25 minutes of solo flying. His private flight check of 1 1/2 hours on July 25, 1947, was unsatisfactory, and he was then given 5 additional hours of dual instruction between July 31 and August 4. His training for private pilot's license was taken in Piper Cubs or Aeroncas. These were light planes, of large wing area, with a 65 horsepower motor, and a maximum speed of 70 to 75 miles an hour. The Ryan was heavier, of less wing spread, with a 165 horsepower motor, and was faster. Farish had only 2 hours and 5 minutes of dual instruction in the Ryan.

Four eyewitnesses testified as to the manner of the crash. Three of these witnesses indicated that the plane was about a mile away and from 'pretty high' to 'about 1500 feet', and 'around 2000 feet', when they first saw it. It rolled, waived a time or two, and went into a bank; or wobbled its wings, made a circle, and went into a bank; or made a counter-clockwise circle, according to their several versions. Two of them heard a loud popping and sputtering sound and the motor ran no more. One of them said it sounded like a car backfiring. It did not level or straighten out of the bank. It then came on down to the ground. The fourth witness thought the plane was going to hit her house. She said the motor roared and stopped. It then went on again; then stopped; and she did not hear it any more. Three of the witnesses went to the scene of the crash for the purpose of rendering assistance. There was no fire. Although they were within 2 or 3 feet of the tank, there was no odor of gasoline and no one saw gasoline anywhere about the plane. Besides, another witness went to the scene about an hour after the crash had occurred. He saw no gasoline and could smell none. There was no cap on the tank. He stuck a stick into the tank twice, but could get no gasoline or evidence thereof.

Two expert witnesses, Cy Emery and William H. Bush, with 7700 and 4500 hours of flying respectively, testified as follows: 17 hours of dual and 18 hours of solo flying is usual for the private course, whereas for a commercial license, dual is about 55 hours and solo about 105 hours. A solo can usually be made by a student after 8 hours of dual instruction. Farish's inability to solo until he had 14 hours and 50 minutes of dual control, indicated that he was slow and that his aptitude was below normal. His dual of only 2 hours against 55 hours and 25 minutes of solo was out of proportion as he needed more dual. The longer a student flies without sufficient dual instruction, the stronger his bad habits of flying become intrenched. Simulation of emergencies must be stressed to enable the student to react with good judgment. Farish did not have enough instruction in maneuvers, climbs, truns, and simulated emergencies. His dual instruction was not in proportion to solo and was not sufficient. There is considerable difference in handling a Piper Cub or Aeronca and a Ryan. The light planes do not respond as quickly as the Ryan, and in transferring from them to the Ryan a minimum of 5 hours of dual instruction is necessary. Two hours and 5 minutes is not enough. Without more dual instruction if the student kicks the rudder and pulls the stick with the same degree as if a light plane, the Ryan will likely go into a steep turn. With over 100 hours in the light planes and only 2 hours and 5 minutes of dual to transfer to a Ryan, the plane would probably be overcontrolled.

J. P. Rogers, appellee's manager and chief flying instructor, called as an adverse witness for cross-examination,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Waugh v. Morgan Stanley & Co.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 1, 2012
    ...which had undertaken to teach student to fly but had failed to instruct student about locked controls); Farish v. Canton Flying Services, Inc., 214 Miss. 370, 58 So.2d 915 (1952) (holding in a wrongful death action against an airplane company that the evidence presented a question for jury ......
  • Waugh v. Morgan Stanley & Co.
    • United States
    • United States Appellate Court of Illinois
    • March 1, 2012
    ...which had undertaken to teach student to fly but had failed to instruct student about locked controls); Farish v. Canton Flying Services, Inc., 58 So. 2d 915 (Miss. 1952) (holding in a wrongful death action against an airplane company that the evidence presented a question for jury as to wh......
  • Grey v. Hayes-Sammons Chemical Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
    • November 7, 1962
    ...occurred in the manufacturer's plant. Magnolia Petroleum Co. v. Stinson, 1957, 230 Miss. 533, 93 So.2d 815; Farish v. Canton Flying Services, 1952, 214 Miss. 370, 58 So.2d 915; Johnston v. Canton Flying Services, 1950, 209 Miss. 226, 46 So.2d 533; Kurn v. Fondren, 1940, 189 Miss. 739, 198 S......
  • Denman v. Denman, 42003
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • November 6, 1961
    ...680, 49 So.2d 582; Southern Pine Electric Power Ass'n v. Denson, 214 Miss. 397, 57 So.2d 859, 59 So.2d 75; Farish v. Canton Flying Services, Inc., 214 Miss. 370, 58 So.2d 915; Thompson v. Jenkins, 330 S.W.2d In determining the question as to whether the appellee was entitled to a directed v......
  • 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