Hames v. Old South Lines, Inc.

• Decision Date: 23 December 1935
• Docket Number: 24779.
• Citation: 183 S.E. 503,52 Ga.App. 420
• Parties: HAMES v. OLD SOUTH LINES, Inc.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

183 S.E. 503

52 Ga.App. 420

HAMES v. OLD SOUTH LINES, Inc.

No. 24779.

Court of Appeals of Georgia, Second Division

December 23, 1935

Rehearing Denied Jan. 27, 1936.

Syllabus by Editorial Staff.

Common carrier is liable for insult, mortification, or embarrassment of passenger resulting directly from failure of common carrier's servants to perform their legal duty to passenger or from their negligent and wrongful acts (Code 1933, § 18-204).

Petition by white girl passenger against bus carrier, based on fact that colored girl seated herself beside plaintiff held not generally demurrable because not showing that plaintiff was actually damaged, since plaintiff might recover nominal, vindictive, or punitive damages, even though she did not recover actual, compensatory, or general damages (Code 1933, §§ 18-204, 68-616).

Petition by white girl passenger against bus carrier, based on fact that colored girl seated herself beside plaintiff held generally demurrable because failing to show that mortification complained of resulted from acts or omissions of carrier's servants (Code 1933, §§ 18-204, 68-616).

Error from Superior Court, Habersham County; B. P. Gaillard, Jr. Judge.

Petition by Edith Hames, by next friend, against the Old South Lines, Inc. To review a judgment sustaining a general demurrer to her petition, plaintiff brings error.

Affirmed.

W. F. Moore and Chas. W. Anderson, both of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.

Edgar Chambers, Jr., and Haas, Gambrell & Gardner, all of Atlanta, for defendant in error.

Syllabus OPINION.

SUTTON Judge.

1. A common carrier by motor vehicle may carry both white and colored passengers in the same vehicle by separating them in the most practicable manner. Code 1933, § 68-616; rule 35 of Public Service Commission as to common carriers by motor vehicles. A common carrier of passengers is bound to exercise extraordinary diligence to prevent insult, injury or harm to a passenger transported by it. Code 1933, § 18-204. As such, it is liable whenever a passenger being transported by it suffers insult, mortification, or embarrassment resulting directly from the failure of its servants to perform their legal duty to such passenger or from their negligent and wrongful acts. See Mason v. N., C. & St. L. R. Co., 135 Ga. 741, 70 S.E. 225, 33 L.RA. (N.S.) 280; Gasway v. A. & W. P. R. Co., 58 Ga. 216; Cole v. A. & W. P. R. Co., 102 Ga. 474, 31 S.E. 107; L. & N. R. Co. v. Chivers, 11 Ga.App. 236, 75 S.E. 13; Wolfe v. Ga., etc., R. Co., 2 Ga.App. 499, 58 S.E. 899; May v. Shreveport Traction Co., 127 La. 420, 53 So. 671, 32 L.R.A. (N.S.) 206, and note.

2. The plaintiff's petition is not subject to general demurrer because it is not shown that the plaintiff was actually damaged by the alleged acts of the defendant or its failure to perform its duty toward her. If the plaintiff suffered insult and was embarrassed and mortified by reason of any negligent acts of the defendant or its servants or their failure to perform their legal duty towards her as a passenger, she would be entitled to recover. L. & N. R. Co v. Chivers, supra. A plaintiff might recover nominal damages, or vindictive or punitive damages, in a proper case, even though she did not recover actual, compensatory, or general damages. A petition that makes out a cause of action...