Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Thomas

Decision Date16 January 1911
Citation133 S.W. 1030,97 Ark. 287
PartiesKANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. THOMAS
CourtArkansas Supreme Court

Appeal from Little River Circuit Court; James S. Steel, Judge reversed.

Judgment reversed and cause dismissed.

Read & McDonough, for appellant.

The act of 1907, read to the jury by the court, has no application to this case. There is no testimony upon which to base such an instruction. No testimony to show how the fire originated nor that any agent or representative of appellant was guilty of any negligence in failing to put it out. Since the act changes the rule of the common law and is highly penal in its nature, it must be strictly construed. 59 Ark. 356; 71 Ark 561.

OPINION

HART, J.

This is an appeal by the Kansas City Southern Railway Company from a judgment rendered against it in favor of T. A. Thomas for the sum of $ 75 for damages alleged to have been sustained by reason of the destruction of his property by fire by the railway company. The defendant railway company has duly prosecuted an appeal to this court.

The plaintiff's home was in the State of Texas, a few miles west of the station of Ravana, in the State of Arkansas. He purchased a ticket over the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company from a station in the State of Oklahoma to Ashdown, in the State of Arkansas. His trunks were shipped as baggage, and when he arrived at Ashdown he had his trunks transferred to the station of defendant on the afternoon of his arrival. He applied to the agent for the purchase of a ticket from Ashdown to Ravana, and says that the agent told him that he could not sell him a ticket until the next morning, a short time before his train was due. He then says that he asked the agent to check his trunks, and that the agent told him he could not do so until the next morning. The trunks were, however, by permission of the agent placed in the wareroom of the railway company at the station. That night, about 1 o'clock, the station was burned, and the trunks of the plaintiff were destroyed by the fire. No testimony was introduced as to the origin of the fire, except one witness testified that it seemed to have commenced around the flue in the colored waiting room. The fire spread rapidly, and the people that assembled were unable to extinguish it.

The cause was tried on the theory that the defendant was liable under the act of April 2, 1907 (Acts of 1907, p. 336), making railroad companies liable for damages caused by fire. The act is as follows:

"Hereafter all corporations, companies or persons, engaged in operating any railroad wholly or partly in this State shall be liable for the destruction of, or injury to, any property, real or personal, which may be caused by fire, or result from any locomotive, engine, machinery, train, car or other thing used upon said railroad, or in the operation thereof, or which may result from, or be caused by, an employee, agent or servant of such corporation, company or person upon or in the operation...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Saffa v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, a Corp.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • January 5, 1926
    ...S.C. 237; Goldberg v. Ahnapee & Western Ry. Co., 105 Wis. 1; Reis v. Minneapolis & St. L. Ry. Co. (Ia.), 179 N.W. 83; Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Thomas, 97 Ark. 287; Illinois Central Co. v. Tronstine, 64 Miss. 834.] Plaintiff applied to the defendant's agent to purchase a ticket and ch......
  • Valley Lumber Company v. Westmoreland Brothers
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • June 18, 1923
    ...instruction No. 9. 132 Ark. 257. Section 85, C. & M. Digest, not applicable because of the contractual relationship between the parties. 97 Ark. 287; note 16 A. L. R. 304; 54 P. 553. 13 N.E. construes a similar statute. Court erred in its instructions relative to question of notice posted b......
  • Saffa v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • January 5, 1926
    ...920, 47 L. R. A. 221, 76 Am. St. Rep. 899; Reis v. Minneapolis & St. L. Ry. Co., 189 Iowa, 988, 179 N. W. 83; Kansas City Southern Ry. Co. v. Thomas, 97 Ark. 287, 133 S. W. 1030; Illinois Central R. Co. v. Tronstine, 64 Miss. 834, 2 So. Plaintiff applied to the defendant's agent to purchase......
  • Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Harris
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • November 18, 1912
  • 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