Little Rock & Ft. Smith Railway Co. v. Stevenson

• Citation: 35 S.W. 787,62 Ark. 354
• Parties: LITTLE ROCK & FT. SMITH RAILWAY COMPANY v. STEVENSON
• Decision Date: 02 May 1896
• Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas

35 S.W. 787

62 Ark. 354

LITTLE ROCK & FT. SMITH RAILWAY COMPANY v. STEVENSON

Supreme Court of Arkansas

May 2, 1896

Appeal from Pope Circuit Court, JEREMIAH G. WALLACE, Judge.

Suit by Alice Stevenson against the Little Rock & Ft. Smith Railway Company and the Missouri Pacific Railway Company. The facts appear in the opinion of the court.

Reversed and remanded.

Dodge & Johnson, for appellant.

1. The evidence fails to support the verdict as against the Missouri Pacific Railway Co.

2. The evidence fails to show any negligence on part of defendant.

3. If plaintiff was injured as alleged, it was due solely to her jumping from a moving train. Her action, under the circumstances, was not only imprudent, but actually reckless and dangerous. Her contributory negligence bars a recovery. 54 Ark. 25; 61 Iowa 555; 61 Miss. 417; 73 Ind. 579; 30 Am. & Eng. R. Cases, 571; 31 id. 45; 1 S.W. 1; 40 Ind. 37; 47 Am. & Eng. R. Cases, 566; ib. 576; Wood on Railroads, 1148; 103 N.Y. 441.

A. S McKennon, for appellee.

The instructions given fully state the law. Those refused were properly refused. 54 Ark. 25; 46 id. 423.

OPINION

BUNN, C. J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries, by appellee against the appellant companies. Damages laid at $ 10,000 and judgment in the trial court for $ 5,000, from which defendant companies appeal to this court.

The appellee boarded one of the passenger cars of the Little Rock & Fort Smith Railroad at Knoxville, and got off at Piney Station, three miles from Knoxville. In alighting from the car she was seriously hurt. It was alleged that her injuries were occasioned by the servants of the railroad company in not stopping the train a sufficient time for her to alight and in attempting to do so, as the train was beginning to move out after a brief stoppage at Piney, she was injured as aforesaid. There is evidence sufficient to sustain the verdict of the jury, and there does not appear to be any reversible error in the instructions, which, upon the whole, presented the case fairly to the jury, and the judgment is therefore affirmed as to the cause of action and the amount of damages.

There is, however, another question in the case,--a question of misjoinder of parties defendant. The complaint alleges a joint ownership, operation, and control of the railroad by both the defendants -- the Little Rock & Fort Smith, and the Missouri Pacific Railroad Companies,--and consequently a joint liability; and the judgment was against both accordingly. On this part of the case, the evidence is as follows: In its answer, the Little Rock & Fort Smith Company alleges that it alone is liable for any damages that may be adjudged in the case, and that its co-defendant was not the owner of the road at the time, and had no control over it, and nothing to do with it, nor any interest in it. The Missouri Pacific answers the same, denying all responsibility in the matter.

On trial, the conductor of the train involved in the charge testifies as follows: "Q. Who is operating this road? A. The Missouri Pacific. Q. The Missouri Pacific is what it is called? A. To the best of my knowledge." The ticket about which the plaintiff had testified being handed to the witness by plaintiff's counsel, he said: "Q. Is this one of the tickets? A. Yes sir, that is one of the tickets. Q. That...