Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Hawkins
| Decision Date | 26 March 1917 |
| Docket Number | 18958 |
| Citation | 74 So. 775,114 Miss. 110 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | ILLINOIS CENT. R. CO. v. HAWKINS |
APPEAL from the circuit court of Carroll county, HON. H. H. RODGERS Judge.
Suit by Margaret Hawkins against the Illinois Central Railroad Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals.
The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court.
Judgment affirmed.
Gardner McBee & Gardner, for appellant.
E. F. Noel and J. W. Conger, for appellee.
Miss Margaret M. Hawkins, the plaintiff, a young lady twenty-three years of age, resident of Atlanta, Ga., brought suit in the circuit court, Second judicial district of Carroll county, to recover two thousand, nine hundred and ninety dollars damages alleged to have been sustained on account of the "wanton, willful, negligent, and reckless conduct" of appellant railroad company in failing to transport her from Vaiden to Holly Springs, Miss., on schedule time, on one of its local passenger trains, in May, 1915, and from a verdict and judgment for eight hundred dollars actual and punitive damages, in favor of Miss Hawkins, the railroad company appeals here.
The facts in the case appear to be that Miss Hawkins desired to go from Vaiden, by way of Holly Springs, to Atlanta, and she inquired through her uncle of the agent of appellant railroad at Vaiden about the train connections with the Frisco Railroad at Holly Springs, and was informed by the agent that she would make connection with the Frisco train at Holly Springs for Atlanta by traveling on one of appellant's local trains. She boarded appellant's passenger train at Vaiden at four thirty-five p. m., with the expectation of reaching Holly Springs at eight thirty-five in accordance with the published schedule and the information given her by the agent, and would make connection there with the Frisco train going to Atlanta at ten forty p. m. After she delivered her ticket, or mileage, to the conductor, and informed him of her desire and expectation to make the connection at Holly Springs for Atlanta, the train arrived at Oxford, where, by order of the superintendent of the railroad, it was detained for about two hours and thirty minutes for the purpose of waiting for, and receiving, a number of schoolgirls as passengers for Holly Springs. On account of this delay of two hours and thirty minutes at Oxford, the train did not arrive at Holly Springs until after the Frisco train had left for Atlanta. Appellee was compelled to remain in the depot hotel at Holly Springs during the night, and departed for Atlanta at nine thirty-five a. m. next day. She complains that she had to pay her hotel bill, and spent a sleepless and troubled night, suffering much nervousness, and subsequently had a week's illness after arriving at Atlanta. She claimed that she suffered greatly in body and mind in having to stay at the hotel alone, as she was not accustomed to traveling alone, and that her situation was uncomfortable and fearful to her, and resulted in much mental suffering, accompanied with subsequent illness.
It appears that this lady had traveled a great deal, with a companion, in the United States, Canada, and Europe. The record further shows that the conductor of the train and the appellant's agent at Holly Springs knew that the schedule of the Frisco Railroad had been changed, so that the train left Holly Springs at an earlier time than previously. The superintendent did not know of this change personally. When the train was being detained at Oxford, the appellee requested the conductor to carry her on to Holly Springs, so that she could make the connection for Atlanta, and he told her that he could do nothing, as the superintendent had ordered the delay of the train at Oxford. The testimony in the record shows that appellee received due courtesy, kind treatment, and a comfortable room at the hotel, and that no employee of the appellant was guilty of any abuse, insult, or oppression, but, on the other hand, they were all courteous, and guilty of no oppressive or offensive conduct toward her.
The only serious question presented in this appeal is whether the facts here justify the infliction of punitive damages. Of course, if there was no willful wrong or gross negligence on the part of the appellant railroad company then punitive damages were not recoverable, and it would follow that no recovery could be had for the mental...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tri-State Transit Co. v. Martin
...... under the duty to return the plaintiff to her destination. . . I. C. Ry. v. Hawkins, 114 Miss. 110, 74 So. 773, L.R.A. 1917D 977; N. O. E. Ry. v. Martin, 140 Miss. 410,. 105 So. ... without more, for an affirmance of the present judgment. See,. also, Illinois Cent. Railroad Co. v. Thomas, 109. Miss. 536, 68 So. 773, and Terry v. Railroad Co.,. 103 Miss. ......
-
Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Blair
...was entitled to recover whether or not she suffered any pecuniary loss. N. O. Jackson-G. N. R. R. v. Hurst, 36 Miss. 660; I. C. R. R. Co. v. Hawkins, 114 Miss. 110; Yazoo M. V. R. R. Co. v. Hardie, first reported in 100 Miss. 132, and after retrial of the case reported in 106 Miss. 436. The......
-
Willis v. McCarty-Holman Co.
...68 Miss. 703; Heirn v. M'Caughan, 32 Miss. 17; Bell v. Morrison, 27 Miss. 28; Continental Cas. Co. v. Garrett, 173 Miss. 675; I. C. R. Co. v. Hawkins, 114 Miss. 110; Stone v. Bank, 153 Miss. 892; Western Union Co. v. Watson, 82 Miss. 101; Singer Sewing Machine Co. v. Stockton, 171 Miss. 209......
-
Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v. Mullen
...... or different. . . 11. Ency. of Pl. & Pr., 288; 14 R. C. L. 751-756; Illinois. Cent. R. R. Co. v. Gortikov, 45 So. 363. . . In any. case it is the duty of a ...Co. v. Williams, 39 So. 489; Y. & M. V. R. Co. v. Fitzgerald, 50 So. 631; I. C. R. Co. v. Hawkins, 74. So. 775; I. C. R. Co. v. Harper, 35 So. 764; R. R. Co. v. White, 82 Miss. 120. . . ......