Hicks v. Ga. S. & P. Ry. Co

Decision Date17 March 1899
CourtGeorgia Supreme Court
PartiesHICKS. v. GEORGIA S. & P. RY. CO.

CarriersInjury to PassengerContributory Negligence.

1. A promise by a conductor to a passenger to stop a train when it arrived at a station at which it was not scheduled to stop, so as to allow the passenger to alight thereat, accompanied by a direction "to be out on the platform, ready to get off, " did not warrant the passenger, except at his own risk, in leaving his seat in a car, and going out on the platform thereof, when the train was rushing by the station at a high rate of speed (in the present instance, 45 miles an hour), and there was no slackening of its speed, or anything indicating an intention by the persons in charge of it to bring it to a stop.

2. The evidence introduced for the plaintiff showing affirmatively that the injuries of which he complained were caused by his own gross negligence, the court was right in granting a nonsuit.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from superior court, Houston county; W. H. Felton, Jr., Judge.

Action by William E. Hicks against the Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.

Guerry & Hall, Nottingham & Polhill, and R. H. Culverhouse, for plaintiff in error.

R.C. Jordan and John I. Hall, for defendant in error.

SIMMONS, C. J. The Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Company ran an excursion train for passengers from Macon, Ga., to Beach Haven, Ga. The train was scheduled to run between these two points without stopping. Hicks purchased a ticket for the round trip; expecting, he claims, to stop at an intermediate station on the way out The train did not stop at this station, but carried him on to Beach Haven. According to his statement when the train was about to return to Macon he approached the conductor, and requested that on the way back the train be stopped at the intermediate station, in order that he might get off. The conductor promised him to stop, and told him to be out on the platform, ready to get off, when the train reached his station. In approaching this station, the train ran rapidly, and Hicks became apprehensive that it would not stop. He left his seat, walked to the platform, took hold of the iron railings, placed one foot on the first step, and had one upon the platform, as the train ran by the station. The train, according to the evidence of Hicks, was going at a rate of not less than 45 miles an hour at that time. When he...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Moore v. Southern Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 26 Septiembre 1911
    ... ... is an unsafe place.' On the same line are May v ... Central R. Co., 80 Ga. 363, 4 S.E. 330; Atlanta & Charlotte R. Co. v. Leach, 91 Ga. 419, 17 S.E. 619, 44 ... Am.St.Rep. 47; Evans v. Charleston R. Co., 108 Ga ... 270, 33 S.E. 901; Hicks v. Georgia Southern R. Co., ... 108 Ga. 304, 32 S.E. 880; Steele v. Central R. Co., ... 123 Ga. 237, 51 S.E. 438, and cases cited." Other cases ... are cited by Chief Justice Fish, in the Hogan Case, in ... addition to those set forth in the extract quoted above. See, ... in this connection, ... ...
  • Southern Ry. Co. v. Hogan
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 24 Julio 1908
    ... ... unsafe place." On the same line are: May v. Central ... R. Co., 80 Ga. 363, 4 S.E. 330; Atlanta & Charlotte ... R. Co. v. Leach, 91 Ga. 419, 17 S.E. 619, 44 Am.St.Rep ... 47; Evans v. Charleston R. Co., 108 Ga. 270, 33 S.E ... 901; Hicks v. Georgia Southern R. Co., 108 Ga. 304, ... 32 S.E. 880; Steele v. Central R. Co., 123 Ga. 237, ... 51 S.E. 438, and cases cited ...          As to ... the other features of the present case, the rulings made in ... the following cases are controlling: In Coleman v ... ...
  • Southern Ry. Co v. Hogan
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 24 Julio 1908
    ...Co. v. Leach, 91 Ga. 419, 17 S. E. 019, 44 Am. St. Rep. 47; Evans v. Charleston R. Co., 108 Ga. 270, 33 S. E. 901; Hicks v. Georgia Southern R. Co., 108 Ga. 304, 32 S. E. 880; Steele v. Central R. Co., 123 Ga. 237, 51 S. E. 438, and cases cited. As to the other features of the present case,......
  • Southern Ry. Co v. Strickland
    • United States
    • Georgia Supreme Court
    • 11 Junio 1908
    ...never ridden on a railroad train before. Held, that under the rulings in Blitch v. Cen. Railroad, 76 Ga. 333, and Hicks v. Ga. So. & Fla. Ry. Co., 108 Ga. 304, 32 S. E. 880, the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. [Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 9, Carriers, §§ 1375-13......
  • 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