Meeder v. Seabd. Air Line Ry

Decision Date28 February 1917
Docket Number(No. 97.)
Citation91 S.E. 527
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court
PartiesMEEDER v. SEABOARD AIR LINE RY.

Appeal from Superior Court, Warren County; Stacy, Judge.

Action by John A. Meeder against the Seaboard Air Line Railway. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

The issues were as follows:

Did the defendant maliciously or willfully, wantonly, and rudely mistreat and humiliate plaintiff while a passenger on its train? Answer: Yes.

"What, if any, damage, is the plaintiff entitled to recover? Answer: $200.

Murray Allen, of Raleigh, for appellant.

T. M. Pittman, of Henderson, and B. B. Williams, of Warrenton, for appellee.

BROWN, J. The plaintiff sues to recover damages as a passenger because he was wrongfully carried by Ridgeway to Norlina, and for punitive damages because of insulting and humiliating conduct towards plaintiff by conductor of the train.

His honor charged the jury:

"Plaintiff having been given actual notice that the train on which he was riding would not stop at Ridgeway, the court charges you that the conductor would have been within his rights to have him put off at Henderson, and that plaintiff was not entitled to insist upon riding upon that train and stop at Ridgeway; and under that rule you will not consider any damages and not any inconveniences which the plaintiff suffered by reason of being put off at Norlina, and by reason of going home in the rain, or any sickness he may have contracted in consequence of such.

"Our court has held (Hutchinson v. Railroad, 140 N. C. 126, 52 S. E. 263, 6 Ann. Cas. 22) that a railroad has a right to make regulations that certain trains shall not stop at all stations provided there are enough to serve local travel, and it does not appear that there was not, and, plaintiff having knowledge of thatfact, it was his duty to obey the instructions of the conductor and have gotten off No. 4 and taken No. 20.

"(There is only one question for you to consider, whether the conduct of the conductor towards the plaintiff was such as to humiliate him on the train, or to bring him into ridicule in the presence of passengers on that train. Understanding that fact, the court charges you that, though the train did not stop at Ridgeway, yet he was entitled to courteous treatment; if the defendant discussed his rights on that train and humiliated and mistreated him, the defendant would be liable for such conduct, and punitive damages may be allowed therefor.)"

To the foregoing charge in parentheses defendant excepts.

The court correctly charged that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover actual damages because he was carried by Ridgeway to Norlina. We think, however, the court erred in submitting the question of punitive damages to the jury, but should have granted the defendant's motion.

The plaintiff testified:

"The conductor took my ticket and said, 'This train does not stop at Ridgeway, and you will have to get off at Henderson.' He said it in a rash and unbecoming manner. I told him that train did stop at Ridgeway. * * * The conductor gave me my ticket back and said, 'You will have to get off at Henderson.' I told him my ticket carried me to Ridgeway. He told me if I did not get off he would have me put off at Henderson. Coach was crowded that day. Those in front and behind me heard what he said. After we got to Raleigh, he said, 'Your stop is at Henderson.' After we left Raleigh ho came through the car again and said my stop was at Henderson. I said, 'If you want me to get off, if you do not want to carry me to Ridgeway, then you can put me off.' I told him my ticket called for Ridgeway and I did not want to get off anywhere else. I refused to pay my fare to Norlina. He then said, 'If you are that kind of a man, I will give you ten cents to pay your fare to Norlina.' I got off at Norlina when the train stopped."

On cross-examination plaintiff testified: "I told the conductor my ticket was for Ridgeway and I was determined to get off there. Don't know that I said that I was not going to get off anywhere else. I said that my ticket did not call for Henderson. Conductor did not say anything about a local train. I knew there was a local that came about 7 o'clock; No. 4...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Tripp v. Am. Tobacco Co, (No. 157.)
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • April 27, 1927
    ...N. C. 113, 129 S. E. 151; Webb v. Tel. Co., 167 N. C. 483, 83 S. E. 568; Cottle v. Johnson, 179 N. C. 426, 102 S. E. 769; Meeder v. Railroad, 173 N. C. 57, 91 S. E. 527; Hodges v. Hall, 172 N. C. 29, 89 S. E. 802; Ammons v. Railroad, 140 N. C. 196, 52 S. E. 731; Hansley v. Railroad, 117 N. ......
  • Sanders Et Ux v. May
    • United States
    • North Carolina Supreme Court
    • February 28, 1917

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT