Jenkins v. General Cab Co. of Nashville
| Decision Date | 20 January 1940 |
| Citation | 135 S.W.2d 448 |
| Parties | JENKINS v. GENERAL CAB CO. OF NASHVILLE, Inc., et al. |
| Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Davidson County; E. F. Langford, Judge.
Action by Ruth Jenkins against the General Cab Company of Nashville, Inc., and another for damages from alleged wrongdoing of taxicab driver. From a judgment sustaining a demurrer to the declaration, plaintiff appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
J. Ross Cheshire, Jr., of Nashville, and P. S. Smith, of Richmond, Va., for plaintiff.
Manier & Crouch, of Nashville, for defendants.
This is an appeal from the judgment of the trial court sustaining a demurrer to the declaration. It is shown by the declaration that plaintiff, with her niece, became passenger for hire on a taxicab operated by defendants in the city of Nashville. Upon entering the taxicab and directing the driver to carry her to a designated place, the plaintiff discovered that he was her estranged husband from whom she was living apart and against whom a divorce suit was pending.
It is charged (1) that the driver operating the cab did so in such reckless manner as to injure plaintiff on the face and about her body; (2) that he struck plaintiff with his fist; (3) that he carried her to the county jail and delivered her to the custody of an officer with the statement that she was drunk; (4) that he forcibly took her purse as she was about to pay the taxicab fare and wrongfully appropriated the purse and contents.
The trial judge sustained defendants' demurrer to the declaration upon the ground that the husband was not liable for wrongs inflicted upon the wife, and, plaintiff having no cause of action against the husband, the immediate wrongdoer, she could not under the doctrine of respondeat superior maintain the action against the husband's employer or master. In support of this proposition defendants refer to and rely on Raines v. Mercer, 165 Tenn. 415, 55 S.W.2d 263, and cases there cited. The rule applied in that case cannot be extended to the facts shown by the declaration in this case. Here the defendant is shown to be a common carrier for hire, and in such case the right to sue the master or superior is not subordinate or secondary to the right to sue the servant. As a common carrier, the defendants owed the duty of safely carrying the passenger and the duty to safely carry was non-delegable. That is to say, where the duty is entrusted by the carrier to the performance of a servant, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nazareth v. Herndon Ambulance Service, Inc.
...attack is by an employee upon a passenger while the contract for transport is being accomplished. See Jenkins v. General Cab Company of Nashville, 175 Tenn. 409, 135 S.W.2d 448 (1940); Restatement (Second) of Agency, § 214 (1958); 9 Fla.Jur.2d Carriers § 116; 139 (1979). Such circumstances ......
-
Chamberlain v. McCleary
...See, e. g., Mahaffey v. Mahaffey, 15 Tenn.App. 570; Raines v. Mercer, 165 Tenn. 415, 55 S.W.2d 263; Jenkins v. General Cab Co. of Nashville, Inc., 175 Tenn. 409, 135 S.W.2d 448; Graham v. Miller, 182 Tenn. 434, 187 S.W.2d 622, 162 A.L.R. 571; Ownby v. Kleyhammer, 194 Tenn. 109, 250 S.W. 2d ......
-
American Fidelity & Cas. Co. v. Pennsylvania Cas. Co.
...Robinson, 3 Cir., 118 F.2d 679, certiorari denied C. A. Ross v. Venuto, 314 U.S. 627, 62 S. Ct. 58, 86 L.Ed. 504; Jenkins v. General Cab Co., 175 Tenn. 409, 135 S.W.2d 448; Hodges v. Johnson, D.C., 52 F.Supp. The second ground of the motion is that the Court erred in ruling that Capital was......
-
Simpson v. Broadway-Manhattan Taxicab Corp.
...371; O'Brien v. Public Service Taxi Company (1949 C.A.3d Pa.), 178 F.2d 211, affirming [D.C.] 83 F.Supp. 55; Jenkins v. General Cab Company, 175 Tenn. 409, 135 S.W.2d 448 (7 N.C.C.A.-N.S. 58); Brockway v. Mordenti, 199 Misc. 898, 103 N.Y.S.2d 621; Hairston v. Atlantic Greyhound Corporation,......