Kansas City Southern Railway Co. v. Thomas
Decision Date | 16 January 1911 |
Citation | 133 S.W. 1030,97 Ark. 287 |
Parties | KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. THOMAS |
Court | Arkansas 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.
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:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Saffa v. Illinois Central Railroad Company, a Corp.
...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
...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.
...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