Ligon v. St. Louis & S. F. R. Co.

• Decision Date: 20 June 1914
• Docket Number: No. 13309.,13309.
• Citation: 184 Mo. App. 187,168 S.W. 647
• Parties: LIGON v. ST. LOUIS & S. F. R. CO.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

168 S.W. 647

184 Mo. A. 187

LIGON v. ST. LOUIS & S. F. R. CO.

No. 13309.

St. Louis Court of Appeals. Missouri.

June 20, 1914.

1. COMMERCE (§ 47) — "INTERSTATE TRANSPORTATION."

Transportation of a passenger from a point in Arkansas to a point in Missouri was "interstate transportation," and governed by the Interstate Commerce Act (Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3154]).

2. CARRIERS (§ 32)—TRANSPORTATION OF PASSENGERS—INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT.

Interstate Commerce Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, § 2, 24 Stat. 379 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3155), prohibiting unjust discrimination in rates, fares, etc., and section 3, prohibiting undue preferences, apply to the transportation of passengers, as well as to the carriage of property.

3. CARRIERS (§ 32) — REGULATION — INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT—CHARGES.

Under Interstate Commerce Act Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, § 2, 24 Stat. 379 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3155), prohibiting unjust discrimination in rates, fares, etc., by carriers, and section 3, prohibiting undue preferences, a passenger, regardless of the arrangement he may have had with the ticket agent, had no right to be transported over a longer route at the tariff rate applicable to a shorter route between two points.

4. CARRIERS (§ 383) — ACTIONS FOR WRONGFUL EJECTION—QUESTION FOR JURY.

In an action by a passenger against a carrier for damages because of being ejected from a train, it was error to submit to the jury the question whether the ticket called for a continuous passage.

5. CARRIERS (§ 384)—ACTION FOR WRONGFUL EJECTION—INSTRUCTIONS.

In an action by a passenger against a carrier for wrongful ejection, defended on the ground that, plaintiff's ticket calling for a shorter route, defendant could not, under Interstate Commerce Act, Feb. 4, 1887, c. 104, 24 Stat. 379 (U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 3154), transport him the longer route on the ticket, it was error to instruct that the jury could consider the fact that on other occasions plaintiff had been transported over the same route by a like ticket.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Dunklin County; W. S. C. Walker, Judge.

Action by Charles Ligon against the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

W. F. Evans, of St. Louis, and W. J. Orr, of Springfield, for appellant. Virgil McKay, of Kennett, and Shepard, Reeves & McKay, of Caruthersville, for respondent.

REYNOLDS, P. J.

Plaintiff, intending to go from Leachville, Arkansas, to Gideon, Missouri, by way of the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad, purchased a ticket, for which he paid $1.20. The distance from Leachville to Kennett is 25 miles, and from Kennett to Gideon it is about 23 miles, a total of 48 miles, and the legal rate being 2½ cents a mile, $1.20 was the legal amount over that route. The ticket which plaintiff purchased at Leachville was a local, single trip ticket, good for one first-class passage from Leachville, Arkansas, to Gideon, Missouri, good only on the date of sale as stamped on the back, no stop-over being allowed. It was stamped on the back "September 8th, 1911," which was the date plaintiff purchased it at Leachville. When on the train and between Leachville and Kennett, plaintiff presented his ticket to the conductor, who punched it and handed it back to him. When the train reached Kennett plaintiff got off, went into the depot and found that the local train running direct from Kennett to Gideon, and which he had expected to catch, and by which his ticket was good, had left and that there would be no other until the following morning. So he again boarded the train upon which he had come from Leachville to Kennett, took his seat and when the conductor came along showed and tendered him his ticket. The conductor told him his ticket was not good on that train beyond Kennett, and that there was an additional fare by that train from Kennett to Gideon and requested plaintiff to pay this additional fare. Plaintiff refusing to do this the conductor told him he would have to get off the train and stopping the train a short distance north of Kennett, plaintiff got off, walked back to Kennett and had to remain there all night, catching his train that went direct to Gideon the next day. Defendant's road branches off at Kennett; one branch going north direct to Gideon, 23 miles, the other east to Hayti, north to Brooks Junction, south to Gideon, the distance from Leachville to Gideon by the route which the train took upon which plaintiff attempted to make the trip being 136 miles. It is made up thus: From Leachville to Kennett, 25 miles; Kennett east to Hayti, 18 miles; Hayti north to Brooks Junction, 47 miles; Brooks Junction south to Gideon, 46 miles. The legal fare of 2½ cents a mile is $3.40. The conductor demanded from plaintiff, if he continued on that train and went by the route the train upon which he was a passenger took, the difference between $1.20 and $3.40, $2.07. By the legal rate of fare we refer to that in evidence as approved by the Interstate Commerce Commission.

Plaintiff having been refused passage of this train unless he paid the extra fare, brought his action against defendant, demanding judgment for $200 actual damages and $500 punitive or exemplary damages and costs.

The answer, after a general denial, avers that plaintiff had purchased a ticket entitling him to ride from Leachville to Gideon and the price paid was $1.20; that this was the legal interstate rate in force at the time between Leachville and Gideon by way of Kennett and Gibson, and not by way of the route mentioned in plaintiff's petition and which plaintiff attempted to travel; that plaintiff, in violation of various sections of the Interstate Commerce Law, in force at the time, attempted to ride by way of a route not authorized by the tariff or under his ticket, and unlawfully and wrongfully refused to pay the legal rate in force and effect at the time between Leachville and Gideon by way of the route he attempted to travel; that by the act of Congress before referred to, it was unlawful for defendant to carry or agree to carry plaintiff between Leachville and Gideon by way of the route mentioned in plaintiff's petition for the price and sum which plaintiff paid from Leachville to Gideon, and any agreement or arrangement or understanding plaintiff may have had with any one to be transported by that way or route mentioned in his petition was in violation of the interstate commerce law, was against public policy and absolutely void.

A general denial was filed by way of replication to this new matter.

The trial before the court and jury resulted in a verdict in favor of plaintiff, the jury in its verdict setting out that the jury assesses—

"his actual damages in the sum of fifty and no hundredths dollars, and we assess his exemplary, or punitive damages at the sum of _______ dollars."

Interposing a motion for new trial and excepting to that being overruled, defendant has duly appealed.

At the close of plaintiff's testimony defendant interposed a demurrer which was overruled.

In an instruction given at the instance of plaintiff, the court told the jury in substance, that if they found that on the day named defendant was operating the railroad between Leachville in Arkansas and Gideon in Missouri; that plaintiff on that date purchased a ticket from the agent of defendant at Leachville "entitling him to continuous...