Haile's Curator v. Texas & P. Ry. Co.

• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit
• Citation: Haile's Curator v. Texas & P. Ry. Co., 60 F. 557 (5th Cir. 1894)
• Decision Date: 23 January 1894
• Docket Number: 167.
• Parties: HAILE'S CURATOR v. TEXAS & P. RY. CO.

60 F. 557

HAILE'S CURATOR v. TEXAS & P. RY. CO.

No. 167.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

January 23, 1894

In his petition the plaintiff in error (also plaintiff in the lower court) avers: That on or about January 29, 1892, in company with James T. Haile, his ward, he took passage on the passenger train of the defendant company, at Dallas, Tex and paid fare, and provided tickets, for himself and his brother, to Baton Rouge, La., in consideration of which fare the said company contracted and bound itself to convey them safely, and without delay and harm, to such destination. 'That this trip was undertaken under directions of a physician, who advised that rest, quiet, and change of scene would restore to full vigor of mind and body the said James T. Haile, who had for some time previous been suffering from an attack of grippe, and was at this time, and in consequence thereof, greatly depressed, mentally and physically, and in an intense nervous condition. That the greater part of said journey had been accomplished in safety, and without any bad effect upon the said James T. Haile, until on the next day January 30, 1892, about 8 a. m., when near the town of Robeline, La., the said train was suddenly, and without warning, precipitated through a burning bridge, and was completely wrecked, and immediately after caught fire and was destroyed. That the shock from the accident was so great that it hurled said James T. Haile from his seat to the floor where he lay utterly helpless and prostrated by the shock and unable to move. The train having in the mean time caught fire, petitioner was forced to carry his brother out of the car, and, on account of the marshy condition of the surrounding country, and his nervous and prostrated condition, to place him on the roadbed, where he was in full view of the burning wreck, and in the midst of the wounded and dying, whose cries and lamentations, added to his already intense nervous state, caused by the accident itself, threw him into a state of excitement, so that petitioner, and those around him, were unable to control or quiet him. That his nervous state became greatly worse during the several hours they were forced to wait on the scene of the wreck for conveyance to the town of Robeline, where they were to wait for the relief train to be sent out by the railroad company. After a further delay of some hours, the relief train arrived, consisting, as petitioner afterwards found, of what is known as an 'emigrant coach,' drawn by a freight engine. The coach was overcrowded with passengers from the wrecked train. The seats and other accommodations were of the crudest kind, entailing great discomfort and inconvenience upon the passengers, and especially upon petitioner's ward, who, in his exhausted, excited, and overwrought state of mind and body, was forced to use same. That the hardships, together with the constant and sudden jerkings and stoppings of the train, caused by the engine used not being properly constructed for such purposes, or because it was improperly handled, kept petitioner's ward and the passengers in constant fear and excitement; and finally, on entering the company's yard in Algiers, La., the train on which was petitioner and his ward was suddenly and violently run into from the rear by a switch engine, through the negligence of defendant's employes. The shock was so violent as to knock petitioner's ward off the seat, to the car floor, and caused great excitement among the passengers, who feared another accident had befallen them. Now, petitioner alleges that since this time his ward has become rapidly worse, as a result of the shock, excitement, and hardship he suffered from the said accident, and he is now insane, and confined in a bettering house, with little or no hope of recovery; and he has therefore been interdicted, and petitioner duly appointed his curator. Petitioner therefore alleges and charges that the present state of his ward's mind was causd and brought about by the injuries and sufferings he underwent on account of the accidents and hardships aforesaid; and he alleges that the said accidents and injuries were caused by the negligence of the defendant company, its employes and agents, for the reason that, by the exercise of due care and caution in the management of its road and the selection of agents, the said accidents could have been avoided. That the said road employed no track walkers to guard against such accidents, and to see that the road was in proper condition, and safe for travelers on the company's trains, as it was in duty bound to do. And by reason of the fact that this section of the road was made up of wooden trestlework, which needed constant vigilance and care to keep it in safe condition, the burning of this bridge for hours before the accident was evidence of gross negligence on the part of the company. That the train to which the accident happened was running at a rate of speed that was dangerous and negligent, considering the character...