Metts v. Louisville & N. R. Co.
| Decision Date | 28 October 1935 |
| Docket Number | 24879. |
| Citation | 182 S.E. 531,52 Ga.App. 115 |
| Parties | METTS v. LOUISVILLE & N. R. CO. et al. |
| Court | Georgia Court of Appeals |
Rehearing Denied Nov. 16, 1935.
Syllabus by Editorial Staff.
Railroad must exercise extraordinary diligence toward passenger in act of alighting from train.
Liability of carrier of passengers begins at starting point and does not end until passenger is discharged.
Railroad has duty to provide at its stations suitable, sufficient, and reasonably safe means to enable passengers to alight from cars without danger.
Train conductor's calling out "all out for (passenger's destination)" indicated that conductor was ready for passenger to disembark, and gave passenger right to assume that railroad had furnished safe place for her to alight.
Carrier ordinarily has no duty to assist passenger in boarding or alighting from train.
Whether circumstances are such as to suggest to carrier necessity of assisting passenger to board or alight from train or car is question for jury.
Where means for boarding or alighting from train are inadequate or unsafe, carrier is bound to assist passengers in boarding or alighting.
Questions of negligence are ordinarily for jury.
Railroad's negligence, as regards injury female passenger sustained from fall in alighting from train held for jury, under petition alleging that railroad was negligent in failing to furnish adequate facilities for disembarking and safe place to alight, and in failing to have employee assist passenger in getting off train, or to have stool placed under last step which was three feet above platform.
Error from Superior Court, Fulton County; John D. Humphries, Judge.
Petition by Mrs. H. L. Metts against the Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company and others. To review a judgment sustaining a general demurrer to her petition, plaintiff brings error.
Reversed.
Carl F Hutcheson and Robt. B. Blackburn, both of Atlanta, for plaintiff in error.
Neely Marshall & Greene and W. Neal Baird, all of Atlanta, for defendant in error.
Syllabus OPINION.
Plaintiff was a passenger on a train operated by the defendants from Augusta to Atlanta. She was accompanied by two minor children, whose fare was paid. Upon arriving at her destination, and the train stopping, the conductor called, "All out for Atlanta," and plaintiff and her children prepared to alight from the train. When plaintiff then attempted to disembark from the car and on reaching the last step leading from the vestibule to the platform of the depot, the same being about three feet above the platform, which was too great a distance for her to make in one step or stride, but which she did not know, and plaintiff having with her a three year old child at the time, she missed her footing, stepped into mid air, stumbled, and fell to the platform. The injuries sued for resulted. Plaintiff alleges that it was the duty of the defendants, she being a paid passenger and they being common carriers for hire, to furnish her with adequate facilities to disembark from the train and with a safe place to alight therefrom; that the defendants should have had an employee at the place to assist her in getting off said train or should have placed a stool under the step for her to step upon in getting off; that she relied upon the defendants to perform this duty; and that as a result of their failure so to do she was injured, which failure she charges as negligence. The court sustained a general demurrer, and to this judgment plaintiff excepts. Held:
1. A railroad company is bound to exercise extraordinary diligence toward a passenger while he is in the act of alighting from the train. Southern Ry. Co. v. Reeves, 116 Ga. 743(4), 42 S.E. 1015. The liability of a carrier of passengers begins at the starting point, and does not end until the passenger is discharged. Brunswick & Western R. Co. v. Moore, 101 Ga. 684, 28 S.E. 1000. It is the duty of a railroad company to provide at its stations suitable, sufficient, and reasonably safe means to enable passengers to alight from cars without danger. Daniels v. Western & A. R. Co., 96 Ga. 786, 22 S.E. 956; Mize v. Southern Ry. Co., 15 Ga.App. 265, 82 S.E. 925; Central Railroad v. Thompson, 76 Ga. 770. See, also, Central R. & Banking Co. v. Perry, 58 Ga. 461(3); Central Railroad v. Whitehead, 74 Ga. 441, 443; Atlanta Consol. St. Ry. Co. v. Bates, 103 Ga. 333(2), 347, 30 S.E. 41; Wilkes v. Western & A. R. Co., 109 Ga. 794, 35 S.E. 165.
When, upon a train coming to a stop at the plaintiff's destination, the conductor called, "All out for Atlanta," this indicated that the conductor was ready for the plaintiff to disembark from the car and she had a right to assume that a safe place for her to alight had been furnished by the defendants. Central Railroad v. Thompson, supra.
2. Ordinarily, there is no duty upon a carrier to assist a passenger in boarding or alighting from its train. Western & A. R. Co. v. Earwood, 104 Ga. 127, 29 S.E. 913; Southern Ry. Co. v. Reeves, supra; Southern Ry. Co. v. Hobbs, 118 Ga. 227, 45 S.E. 23, 63 L.R.A. 68; Tucker v. Central of Georgia Ry. Co., 122 Ga. 387, 50 S.E. 128; Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Madden, 135 Ga. 205, 69 S.E. 165, 31 L.R.A. (N. S.) 813, 21 Ann.Cas. 1077; Georgia & F. R. Co. v. Thigpen,
141 Ga. 90, 80 S.E. 626; Southern Ry. Co. v. Wright, 6 Ga.App. 172, 64 S.E. 703; Mize v. Southern Ry. Co., supra.
(a) Whether in a given case the circumstances are such as to suggest the necessity of assisting a passenger to board or alight from a train or car is a question to be determined by the jury. Southern Ry. Co. v. Reeves, supra; Southern Ry. Co v. Wright, supra; Southern Ry. Co. v. Crabb, 10 Ga.App. 559, 73 S.E. 859; Central of Georgia Ry....
To continue reading
Request your trial