Grimes v. Pennsylvania Co.

• Citation: 36 F. 72
• Parties: GRIMES v. PENNSYLVANIA CO.
• Decision Date: 01 January 1888
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of Ohio

36 F. 72

GRIMES v. PENNSYLVANIA CO.

United States Circuit Court, N.D. Ohio, Eastern Division.

April Term, 1888

McCoy &amp Taylor and M. R. Dickey, for plaintiff.

J. R Carey, for defendant.

WELKER J., (charging jury.)

The plaintiff, a resident of Augusta, Columbiana county, Ohio, on the evening of the 21st of March, 1887, went to the station called Kensington, on the Cleveland & Pittsburgh Railroad to Alliance, the regular passenger train being due at 2:25 A.M and freights at different times before that hour. She arrived at the station about 9 o'clock in the evening, and went upon the platform near the waiting-room, she, with a lady friend, walked around the corner of the station-house, it being dark, and, intending to go off the platform upon the ground, stepped off the platform at a point where it was some five feet high, falling to the ground, and thereby was severely injured. She sues the defendant to recover damages for her injury, and alleges in her petition, as the grounds of recovery, that the defendant was negligent and careless in that the platform of the railroad was improperly and dangerously constructed, and station carelessly managed; that it was dark, and the platform was not properly lighted, so as to make it safe to be used by her as such passenger, and that the east end of the platform, where she stepped off, had no railing around it, to protect passengers from danger of going off the same. She also alleges that her injury was produced by this negligence and carelessness of the defendant, and that she was herself not guilty of any fault or carelessness. These allegations and denial form the issue you are to try. To entitle the plaintiff to recover she must establish the negligence and carelessness on behalf of the defendant described in her petition, or some one or more of them, and that such negligence caused her injury. Not much claim is made of negligence in the original construction of the platform at the station, except the want of railing at the east end thereof; but the principal complaint as to negligence is the absence of proper lights upon the platform at the time of the injury.

Negligence and carelessness very largely depend upon the duties required of the parties. As a general proposition, a railway company being common carriers of freight and passengers, has the right to construct its depot and platform used on its road so as to make it convenient, safe, and proper to safely and conveniently transact the business to be done at the station. It is also its duty to make and keep its platforms, waiting-rooms, and approaches in such a way as will be safe for those having business there as passengers, proposed passengers, or otherwise, who may be expected to come there for such lawful purposes. For the convenience and safety of the public, and for their own safety and transaction of the business of common carriers, railroads adopt and publish time-tables, giving schedules of times of arrival and departure of the different trains at the depots at which they stop, and these schedules constitute an invitation to the public and persons desiring to use the railroad as passengers or for business to be there at such times of arrival and departure of trains, and also, impliedly, within a reasonable time before such arrivals and departures, to enable persons desiring passage to avoid hurry and confusion to the purchase of tickets, and getting ready to enter the cars. It was the duty of the defendant to place and keep upon its platform, in the night-time, suitable and proper lights to protect and make it safe for passengers who may desire to go upon the trains or get off trains, at the times of the arrivals and departures of trains so advertised to stop, or which were accustomed to stop, at the station. It was also the duty of the defendant, within a reasonable time before...