Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. v. Martino

• Decision Date: 23 February 1892
• Citation: 18 S.W. 1066
• Parties: MISSOURI PAC. RY. CO. v. MARTINO.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

18 S.W. 1066

MISSOURI PAC. RY. CO. v. MARTINO.

Supreme Court of Texas.

February 23, 1892.

Commissioners' decision. Section B. Appeal from district court, Dallas county.

Action by J. F. Martino against the Missouri Pacific Railway Company to recover for personal injury to plaintiff's wife. Plaintiff had judgment, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

The other facts fully appear in the following statement by FISHER, J.:

This suit is by appellee to recover from appellant $5,000 as damages resulting from injuries received by his wife in traveling from St. Louis, Mo., to Dallas, Tex. The case was tried by a jury, and resulted in a verdict and judgment in appellee's favor for $2,020.45. The petition, in substance, alleges that on or about the 13th day of September, 1886, plaintiff's wife wishing to visit the city of St. Louis, he purchased from the agent of the Houston & Texas Central Railway Company at Dallas, Tex., a first-class excursion ticket for his wife from Dallas, Tex., to St. Louis and return; that he paid for said ticket the sum of $20.80; that said agent then and there stamped said ticket, and the said Lillie Martino signed the same, as required by the terms of said ticket; that said ticket was good for the return trip until October 29, 1886; that on the 13th day of September, 1886, the said Lillie Martino, with her little child, started from Dallas on the cars of the Houston & Texas Central Railroad, and proceeded on said cars to Denison, Tex., and then proceeded to St. Louis from Denison on defendant's road; that in going to St. Louis said ticket was duly honored by the conductors of said roads, and that the said Lillie Martino had no trouble in going from Dallas to St. Louis. The petition then alleges that said Lillie Martino, having finished her visit at St. Louis, on October 6, 1886, presented said ticket to the agent of defendant at its office in St. Louis, and requested him to sign and stamp the same, as required by the terms of said ticket. That said agent looked at said ticket, contemptuously handed it back to said Lillie Martino, and refused to have it signed or stamped, saying it was "no good." That she was a stranger in St. Louis, and had spent all the money she had taken with her, and, having with her her little child, did not know what to do. That she got on defendant's train of cars at St. Louis, and started home. That the conductor from St. Louis to Sedalia examined her ticket, and passed her to Sedalia without objection. That at Sedalia another conductor took charge of said train. That she showed him her ticket, and that he refused to honor the same. That she told him she had no money, and that he then took her baggage-check, and told her he would let her ride to Dallas, and that he would notify the next conductor of this arrangement. That at Parsons, Kan., the next conductor took charge of said train, and that when he came round for tickets it was midnight; and that she was lying with her head on the seat in front of her, and was asleep. That this conductor, upon reaching her, caught her by the hair, and jerked her head back, nearly breaking her neck, and said to her in a violent and insulting manner, "Madam, your ticket." That his manner was so violent and insulting that she became very much frightened. That she told him that she had given the conductor from Sedalia to Parsons her trunk check, and that said conductor had promised she could ride to Dallas, and that she asked the conductor if the former conductor had not told him that he had her check for her trunk. That the conductor then in a very insulting manner told her he knew nothing about her trunk check, and that she must either pay her fare or get off the train. That she told him she had no money. Then he told her to give him her watch and chain as security for her fare, and he would let her ride to Dallas. That he said, "Pay me the fare, give me your jewelry, or get off the train." That being alone with her little child, and among strangers, and the conduct of the conductor being so violent and harsh, she did not know what to do, and gave him her watch and chain. That he then handed her back her trunk check, although he had just before denied having it. That when said train reached Denison said conductor deposited said watch and chain with appellant's ticket agent there, to secure her fare to Dallas. That plaintiff afterwards had to send to the ticket agent at Denison $20.45 to redeem said watch and chain for fare wrongfully charged his said wife. That when plaintiff met his wife at the train on her arrival at Dallas she was in tears, and nearly distracted; and she then told him of the wrongs, insults, and indignities she had suffered on her trip at the hands of defendant's agents. That he took her home, and she was sick and confined in her room for a number of days, and was unable to attend to her duties, and the same caused your petitioner much pain and anguish. That all such sickness, pain, and anguish were caused from acts of defendant's agents as aforesaid. Defendant pleaded a general demurrer, and excepted specially: (1) To all that portion of said petition which charges that its agent at St. Louis refused to countersign said ticket, as required by the terms of said ticket, and that said agent contemptuously handed the ticket back to plaintiff's wife, saying it was "no good;" that Mrs. Martino was without money, and did not know what to do, and got upon defendant's train, etc.; because the same are irrelevant and inadmissible matters in this suit, and were injected in it to prejudice the rights of appellant. (2) To the allegations of pain and anguish suffered by petitioner, because the husband's anguish is too remote. (3) To the allegations of said petitioner charging that its conductor approached plaintiff's wife while she was asleep, and caught her by the hair, and jerked her, and nearly broke her neck, because said allegations are too improbable, and lack verity on the face thereof. Defendant further pleaded a general denial, and specially pleaded that, according to the terms of said ticket or contract, in order for Lillie Martino to be entitled to return thereon from St. Louis to Dallas, it was contracted and agreed, for and on account of the reduced rate or charges therefor, that she would sign said ticket at St. Louis, and have same stamped by defendant's agent at St. Louis, and that if she failed so to do said ticket was to become null and void. That she did fail so to do, and that said conductor, as he was in duty bound to do, according to the terms of said ticket or contract, refused to accept said ticket, and demanded her fare. Defendant expressly denied that its conductor caught plaintiff's wife by the hair, or jerked her, or in any other way mistreated her, but that he, on the contrary, treated her kindly, credited her for her fare from St. Louis to Dallas, taking security therefor, she being a stranger to him, which amount plaintiff afterwards paid, as he was in duty bound to do, upon which payment the watch and chain given as security for her fare were returned to her. The court overruled the general and special demurrers.

These are the facts briefly stated: September 13, 1886, appellee, for the use of his wife, purchased from the Houston & Texas Central Railway Company at Dallas, Tex., a first-class tourist ticket, good until October 29, 1886. The ticket was signed by Mrs. Lillie Martino, the wife of appellee, and entitled her to passage from Dallas, Tex., to St. Louis, Mo., and return. The ticket contains a stipulation that it is not good for return passage unless the holder signs the same, and identifies himself as the original purchaser to the satisfaction of the authorized agent of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company at St. Louis, Mo., on or before October 15, 1886; and when duly witnessed by the agent, and dated in ink, and duly stamped by said agent, the ticket shall then be good until October 29, 1886; and that the original purchaser agrees to sign his name and otherwise identify himself as such whenever called upon to do so by any conductor or agent of the lines over which the ticket reads, and on failure or refusal the ticket shall become void. Mrs. Martino traveled from Dallas to St. Louis on the ticket about October 5 or 6, 1886. Desirous of returning to Dallas, she presented the ticket to the ticket agent of the Missouri Pacific Railway Company at St. Louis, with request to sign and stamp same. The agent returned the ticket to her with the statement that it was not good, and refused to sign and stamp it. She then, without the ticket being signed or stamped by the St. Louis agent, boarded appellant's train on her return trip to Dallas. The conductor on appellant's train between St. Louis and Sedalia, Mo., honored the ticket, and passed her to the latter place. There another conductor took charge of the train, and ran it to Parsons, Kan. The conductor between Sedalia and Parsons examined the ticket, and refused to permit her to ride on it, and demanded of her her fare in money. Mrs. Martino then stated to him that she had no money. He then asked if she had any baggage, and, upon her replying she had, he then demanded her baggage check, which she delivered to him. The conductor then handed her a paper check, telling her to keep it; that she could ride to Dallas on it. About midnight another conductor took charge of the train at Parsons, and ran it to Denison. Mrs. Martino testified "that it must have been about this time of the night. I was resting my head upon my arm on the seat in front of me, and the conductor came along and struck me on the head hard, and said, `Ticket, madam,' in a very rough manner. He said, `I want your ticket.' I handed him the ticket, but he did not hardly look at it before he said it was not good. He said he would have to have baggage, money, or jewelry, or I would have to get off the train. I said I would like to have my trunk. I asked him if he knew the name...