Ft. Scott
Decision Date | 06 April 1895 |
Citation | 39 P. 1032,55 Kan. 288 |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Parties | THE FORT SCOTT, WICHITA & WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY et al. v. J. H. SPARKS |
Error from Harvey District Court.
ON the 13th day of July, 1883, J. H. Sparks commenced his action against the Fort Scott, Wichita & Western Railway Company and the Missouri Pacific Railway, Company to recover $ 50,000 for personal injuries which he alleged resulted to him from the negligence of the companies. Trial had, at the February term of the court for 1890, before the court with a jury. On the 3d day of March, 1890, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants for $ 10,000, and also made special findings of fact in writing. On the 3d of March, 1890, the railway companies filed their motions for judgment in their favor upon the special findings of the jury notwithstanding the general verdict. These motions were overruled. Thereupon the railway, companies filed their motions for a new trial containing the usual statutory grounds. These motions were heard on the 20th of May, 1890, and overruled. Thereupon the court rendered judgment in favor of J. H. Sparks and against the railway companies for $ 10,000, with costs taxed at $ 382.64. The Railway Companies excepted, and bring the case here.
Judgment reversed and cause remanded.
J. H Richards, and C. E. Benton, for plaintiffs in error.
J. D Houston, and W. H. Boone, for defendant in error.
OPINION
The Fort Scott, Wichita & Western Railway Company, on the 18th day of May, 1888, made a written contract with J. H. Sparks to transport eight car-loads, consisting of 107 head of cattle and 75 hogs, from Conway Springs, in this state, via Kansas City, Mo., to Chicago, Ill., and to carry Sparks on the train in which his stock was taken. The contract was signed by Sparks and C. M. Stewart, the agent of the railway company, in duplicate. One was delivered to Sparks prior to the shipment of the stock and the other was retained by the agent of the railway company. The contract contained the following provisions:
"For the consideration aforesaid, the said second party hereby further agrees that the said persons in charge of said stock under this contract shall remain in the caboose-car attached to the train while the same is in motion, and that whenever such persons shall leave the caboose-car or pass over or along the cars or track they shall do so at their own risk of personal injury from every cause whatever, and that the said first party shall not be required to stop or start its trains or caboose-cars from depots or platforms, or to furnish lights for the accommodation or safety of such persons."
At the date of the contract the stock was shipped from Conway Springs, and Sparks had accompanying him James M. Harper, J. A. Fowler, J. C. Dudley, and R. F. Hargrove, as attendants of the stock. The train consisted of 11 cars of stock, a caboose, an engine, and tender. Between Conway Springs and El Dorado, Sparks and his men rode in the caboose-car, attached to the train, arriving at El Dorado, in this state, the end of a division, about 8 o'clock P. M. on the 18th. The train stopped at the station, with the engine at the water-tank. Sparks was a regular shipper of stock over the road, and had general knowledge of the depot and yards at the station. Before their arrival at El Dorado, Sparks and his men were notified that they would have to change cabooses. Sparks got out of the caboose after the train had come to a full stop, and started with Harper and their luggage for the outgoing caboose. After the arrival of the train at El Dorado, the incoming caboose was detached from the train and placed on to a switch north of the main track. The outgoing caboose was located on a switch south of the main track, and 400 to 500 feet from the point where the incoming caboose stopped. This caboose had a red light on the outside at its west end. There was only one track--the main track--between the incoming caboose and the outgoing caboose. There were no switch-engines or trains moving at the time in the yards at the station, except the train carrying Sparks's stock. Main street, near the passenger depot, and not far from where the west end of the stock-train stopped on its arrival at the station, was lighted by an electric arc-light, and there was light at the depot and other parts of the yards. The direction of the outgoing caboose pointed out to Harper, who was with Sparks. The latter, with Harper, walked eastward in the direction of the outgoing caboose from 200 to 300 feet. This caboose was from 200 to 300 feet further east. While proceeding on their way in the direction of the outgoing caboose, they came up to the main stock-train. They mounted with their luggage to the top of nearest car, directly after which they, together with the other three attendants, were transferred to the point of the outgoing caboose. They got on the top of the stock-car about four minutes after leaving the the incoming caboose. James M. Harper, a witness for plaintiff below, testified, among other things, as follows:
Sparks testified, among other things, as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Winters v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.
... ... and direct than in the case at bar, as, for example, in ... Atchison Railroad Co. v. Lindley, 42 Kan. 714, 22 P ... 703, 6 L.R.A. 646, 16 Am.St.Rep. 515, in which a person ... riding on the top of a car was injured by a sudden jerk of ... the train, and Ft. Scott Ry. Co. v. Sparks, 55 Kan ... 288, 39 P. 1032, in which a person riding on the top of a ... caboose was injured by being knocked off by an overhead ... It is ... true that in Little Rock v. Miles, 40 Ark. 298, 48 ... Am.Rep. 10, it was held that a drover riding on the top of a ... ...
-
Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Tietken
... ... Stroud, 64 Miss. 784.) ... In ... support of an argument in favor of the contention that the ... verdict is against the weight of evidence and not supported ... by the evidence reference is made to the following cases: ... Omaha & R. V. R. Co. v. Crow, 47 Neb. 84; Ft. Scott, ... W. & W. R. Co. v. Sparks, 55 Kan. 288 ... The ... verdict of the jury is against the instructions of the court ... and the judgment should be reversed. (Meyer v. Midland P ... R. Co. 2 Neb. 319; Aultman v. Reams, 9 Neb. 487.) ... John C ... Watson ... ...
-
Scrivner v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
...conditions we have set out, supra. These restrictions in a contract of carriage have been held to be reasonable and valid. [Railroad v. Sparks, 55 Kan. 288, 39 P. 1032; Tuley v. Railroad, 41 Mo.App. 432; Fussellman Railroad, 139 Mo.App. 198; Bruce v. Railroad, 136 Mo.App. 204, 116 S.W. 447;......
-
Hulet v. Payne
... ... the risk of injury when not observing such regulation, is ... valid, and not against sound public policy, and prevents ... recovery for injuries received as the consequence of his ... violation of the regulation. Fitchburg R. Co. v ... Nichols, 85 F. 945, 948, 29 C.C.A. 500; Ft. Scott, ... W. & W. Ry. Co. v. Sparks, 55 Kan. 288, 39 P. 1032; ... Leslie v. Atchison, T. & S.F. Ry. Co., 82 Kan. 152, ... 107 P. 765, 27 L.R.A. (N.S.) 646; Chicago, B. & Q. Ry ... Co. v. Mann, 78 Neb. 541, 111 N.W. 379; Oaks v ... Chicago, R.I. & P. Ry. Co., 174 Iowa, 648, 156 N.W. 740; ... ...