Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Chambers

• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals
• Writing for the Court: HANNAH, J.
• Citation: Louisville & N.R. Co. v. Chambers, 178 S.W. 1101, 165 Ky. 736 (Ky. Ct. App. 1915)
• Decision Date: 28 September 1915
• Parties: LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. CHAMBERS.

178 S.W. 1101

165 Ky. 736

LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. v. CHAMBERS.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

September 28, 1915

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Common Pleas Branch Fourth Division.

Action by W. E. Chambers against the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed.

Helm &amp Helm, Benjamin D. Warfield, and C. H. Moorman, all of Louisville, for appellant.

S. L Trusty, of Louisville, for appellee.

HANNAH J.

This is a companion case to Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. Mrs. Mahala Chambers, decided September 23, 1915, in which the circumstances relative to the accident are fully stated. Appellee herein is the husband of the appellee in that case and they were occupying the same bed at the time the freight car crashed into the fence in front of their residence. While she went to the east, over the foot of the bed, he awoke to find his head entangled in the rods at the head of the bed as the result of which, after extricating himself, he found a "little knot" on the side of his head, with reference to which "little knot" he said: "I never had it before; I must have got it there." This, together with certain spinal defects discovered by the medical experts who explored his anatomy therefor, formed the basis of a verdict and judgment in his favor in the sum of $300 against the railroad company, which seeks relief by prayer for the granting of an appeal and for the reversal of the judgment.

Despite his injuries, appellee was able to continue at his work at the Avery Plow Manufactory without missing a single working day on account of said injuries, for some five or six months and possibly longer, immediately after the occurrence mentioned, and he was still working there at the time of the trial. He testified that, when the crash came, his wife screamed and went over the foot of the bed, and he went to jump up right quick, and struck the bed, and found that he was fastened in the rods at the head of the bed; that "I found out where I was, and I lowered my head; I knew where the big place was, and I pulled my head out." The rods were so shaped as to be nearer together at the bottom than higher up, and he extricated himself by raising his head about two feet above the pillow, where the space between the rods was wide enough to permit him to withdraw his head. How or when he got in the position in which he found himself when he tried to get up he could not tell.

1. There has been recognized in this state the rule that where a passenger, through the negligence of the carrier, is placed in a position of seeming peril, and acting upon a natural impulse seeks safety in that course which an ordinarily prudent person, situated in a like or similar position, would reasonably have been expected to take, he may recover for the injuries thereby sustained. Big Sandy & C. R. Co. v Blankenship, 118 S.W. 315. See, also, Davis v. Paducah R. & L. Co., 113 Ky. 267, 68 S.W. 140, 24 Ky. Law Rep. 135. The duty of a carrier to its passengers is of the highest degree known to the law. But the rule above mentioned has also been applied...