L. & N.R. Co. v. Wells

• Citation: 219 Ky. 718
• Court: United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
• Decision Date: 06 May 1927
• Parties: Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Wells.

219 Ky. 718

Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Wells.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Decided May 6, 1927.

1. Carriers. — In action for damages by passenger against railroad for putting her off at wrong station, damages recoverable, where carrier's breach of contract was not tortious, were such as would compensate passenger for loss of time occasioned by delay and extra expense caused thereby.

2. Carriers. — Action of carrier in putting off female passenger at wrong station held not tortious breach of contract, where passenger was discharged at depot of city in which she could be and was well cared for.

3. Carriers. — Female passenger put off at wrong station could not charge against carrier physician's bill incurred due to cold contracted in unheated ladies' waiting room in station, where main waiting room was heated.

4. Carriers. — In action by passenger against carrier for damages on account of being put off at wrong station, testimony of passenger that she was going to see a sick relative held inadmissible, where carrier had no notice of purpose of visit.

Appeal from Harlan Circuit Court.

WOODWARD, WARFIELD & HOBSON, ASHBY M. WARREN, LOW & BRYANT, J.C. ADKINS and J.C. BAKER for appellant.

GEORGE R. POPE for appellee.

OPINION OF THE COURT BY JUDGE DIETZMAN.

Reversing.

The appellee on January 21, 1925, bought a ticket from Dayton, Ohio, to Evarts, Ky. She rode from Dayton to Cincinnati on the Big Four and there changed to the road of the appellant. In order to get to Evarts it is necessary for travelers from Cincinnati to change trains at Corbin, Ky. Appellee left Cincinnati on the night of January 21st. She testifies that when the conductor came to collect her ticket he told her, after he had ascertained her destination, that she would have to change cars at Winchester. She says that as she knew no better she relied on his statement. She says that she then dozed in her seat until just before her train reached Winchester, when the conductor came to her and said that this was where she had to transfer. She inquired of him, as she says, how long it would be before her train to which she would have to transfer would come through Winchester, and he responded: "About ten minutes." She says that pursuant to these directions she got off the train at Winchester and walked into the main waiting room where the ticket office was. She admits that this room was warm. Instead of staying in this room, she went into an adjacent room, which was the ladies' waiting room, and which she says was very cold. She sat down to wait the arrival of her train, and, it not coming, she went, in about half an hour, back into the main waiting room and inquired of the ticket seller as to when her train would come. She then learned that she ought not to have gotten off the train she did but should have stayed on it until it got to Corbin. She further learned that there would be no other train which she could take until the next day. She admits that the ticket seller at once called up a nearby hotel, and in a very short time the porter of the hotel came to the station, got her grips, and escorted her to the hotel, where she stayed until the next morning. She then went on her way to her destination, arriving there about 24 hours later than she would have arrived had she not gotten off at Winchester the night before. She claims that due to the lack of heat in the ladies' waiting room she contracted a very severe cold. The conductor of the appellant, although being unable to recall having seen appellee at all on the train that night, denies that he made any such statement as is attributed to him by her. Due to the...