Hill v. Chattanooga Ry. & Light Co

• Decision Date: 31 October 1917
• Docket Number: (No. 8806.)
• Citation: 21 Ga.App. 104,93 S.E. 1027
• Parties: HILL. v. CHATTANOOGA RY. & LIGHT CO.
• Court: Georgia Court of Appeals

21 Ga.App. 104

93 S.E. 1027

HILL.

v.CHATTANOOGA RY. & LIGHT CO.

(No. 8806.)

Court of Appeals of Georgia,

Division No. 2.

Oct. 31, 1917.

(Syllabus by the Court.)

Error from Superior Court, Catoosa County; M. C. Tarver, Judge.

Suit by attachment by J. B. Hill against the Chattanooga Railway & Light Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff brings error. Affirmed.

Hill brought suit by attachment against the Chattanooga Railway & Light Company, a foreign corporation, claiming damages for personal injuries alleged to have been inflicted by defendant's agents in the negligent operation of its street car. The petition alleged that on July 17, 1914, plaintiff undertook to board one of defendant's cars in Rossville at a point where the car turned into Rossville Boulevard, and just as he was attempting to board the car as a passenger of the defendant, as was usual and customary for passengers to do at said point, the employes of the defendant in charge of the car caused it to start suddenly and with a jerk, throwing him to the ground and inflicting on him certain described injuries. It was alleged that the defendant's agents in charge of the car were negligent in stopping it upon a curve, where the car, when started, would start with a swing and would tend to throw passengers to the ground, and in failing to keep a lookout and to wait until the plaintiff could get safely aboard, and also in starting the car before he had safely gotten upon it, and in starting the car with a sudden jerk, so as to throw him to the ground, and in not giving petitioner warning of the starting of the car and of the intention to start it. The defendant in its answer denied the material allegations of the petition, and the case went to trial before a jury.

Upon the trial the plaintiff gave testimony in his own behalf in support of the allegations of his petition. He swore that defendant's car had stopped at its customary stopping place, just before turning into Rossville Boulevard; that the car was stopped on a sharp bend; that just as he put his right foot on the step to board the car, his right hand grasping the right support and his left hand carrying his sample case, the conductor rang the signal for the car to start, the car started with a jerk, and plaintiff's foot was caught between the step of the car and the curbstone, the plaintiff all the while holding onto the right support. He further testified that "the conductor or anybody in control of the car did nothing to stop the car." The conductor in charge of the car testified that on the occasion in question his car stopped at its customary place; that no passengers got on or off the car; that the car startedoff, and had gone about a car's length, when he saw the plaintiff running towards the car, trying to catch it, with his sample case in his left hand; that just as the plaintiff approached within four feet of the car his foot slipped on a round rock, causing him to fall and his right leg to slide under the step of the car and receive the injuries claimed. His testimony further showed that the injury occurred beyond the state line and in the state of Tennessee. The testimony of the motorman on this car and of several disinterested bystanders was in all material respects the same as that of the conductor. Both sides closed, and the jury, after being charged by the court, returned a verdict in favor of the defendant railway company.

W. E. Mann, W. C. Martin, and J. M. Rudolph, all of Dalton, for plaintiff in error.

W. H. Payne, of Chattanooga, Tenn., and Maddox, McCamy & Shumate, of...