Kansas City v. Dalton

• Decision Date: 08 November 1902
• Docket Number: 12,754
• Citation: 65 Kan. 661,70 P. 645
• Court: Kansas Supreme Court
• Parties: KANSAS CITY, FORT SCOTT & MEMPHIS RAILROAD COMPANY v. JENNIE DALTON

70 P. 645

65 Kan. 661

KANSAS CITY, FORT SCOTT & MEMPHIS RAILROAD COMPANY v. JENNIE DALTON

No. 12,754

Supreme Court of Kansas

November 8, 1902

Decided July, 1902.

Error from Miami district court; JOHN T. BURRIS, judge.

Judgment reversed and new trial rewarded.

SYLLABUS

SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.

RAILROADS--Injury to Passenger--Fright or Mental Suffering. In an action for damages sustained by reason of the negligence of a railway company in carrying a passenger beyond her point of destination in the night-time, thereby causing her expense annoyance, inconvenience, loss of time, fright, and mental suffering, no recovery can be had for the fright or mental suffering as an independent element of damages, unaccompanied by physical or bodily injury.

Pratt, Dana & Black, for plaintiff in error.

Frank M. Sheridan, for defendant in error.

POLLOCK J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

POLLOCK, J.:

This was an action brought by Jennie Dalton to recover damages from the railroad company for negligence in the discharge of its duty toward plaintiff, as a passenger. The facts were that plaintiff, accompanied by her sister, purchased a ticket and took passage upon one of defendant's trains from Kansas City to Fontana, Kan. The train left Kansas City about 9:45 P. M., and was due to arrive at Fontana about 11:40 P. M. It was a regular passenger-train, not scheduled to stop at Fontana except upon signal. The brothers of plaintiff were at the depot at Fontana with a conveyance to carry the sisters to their home, some two and one-half miles in the country. The train was not stopped at Fontana, but plaintiff was carried on to the station of La Cygne, some ten miles beyond her destination. When the train arrived at La Cygne, plaintiff was required to alight therefrom, and was carried back to Fontana on a freight-train, where she was compelled to hire a conveyance to carry herself and sister to their destination in the country.

It was alleged and shown that plaintiff was caused delay, expense, inconvenience, fright and mental suffering by being carried beyond her destination, in being compelled to ride upon a freight-train in the nighttime, and in seeking for a conveyance to carry her and her sister from Fontana into the country, by reason of the negligence of the servants of defendant company in failing to stop the train at Fontana, and it was alleged in the petition that such negligence was wilful and wanton. No complaint of physical injury to plaintiff was alleged or shown. Plaintiff had a general verdict and judgment thereon for the sum of $ 300.

In answer to special questions propounded to the jury, the sum allowed in the general verdict was divided as follows: For expense incurred, $ 4.50; inconvenience and trouble, $ 45; loss of time, fifty cents; mental suffering, pain, and shock, $ 250. In answer to a special question, the jury refused to find any amount as punitive damages. A motion for a new trial having been overruled, defendant brings error.

The court instructed the jury in regard to the measure of damages as follows:

"If the plaintiff recover in this action, she should recover in such sum as the jury shall find from the evidence she is entitled to as a full compensation for the additional expense, if any, which she has necessarily incurred, for the delay and consequent loss of time, if any, and for the annoyance, fright and mental anguish, if any, caused by the negligence of the defendant, its agents or employees."

This instruction and the findings made by the jury raise the question whether fright, mental suffering, pain, and shock caused by the negligence of defendant, independent of, and unaccompanied by, physical injury, can be made the basis of a claim for damages. This question would seem to be well settled by the decisions of this court and in...