Nashville, C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Newsome

• Decision Date: 02 November 1918
• Parties: NASHVILLE, C. & ST. L. RY. CO. v. NEWSOME ET UX.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

206 S.W. 33

141 Tenn. 8

NASHVILLE, C. & ST. L. RY. CO.
v.
NEWSOME ET UX.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

November 2, 1918

Appeal from Circuit Court, Hamilton County; Nathan L. Bachman, Judge.

Action by James Newsome and wife against the Nashville, Chattanooga & St. Louis Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiffs was reversed by the Court of Civil Appeals, and the case brought to Supreme Court. Judgment of Civil Appeals affirmed, and case remanded for new trial.

GREEN, J.

This suit was brought by Newsome and wife to recover damages for injuries alleged to have been sustained by Mrs. Newsome in alighting from one of the trains of plaintiff in error, on which she was a passenger, at the town of Jasper.

The particular train was of unusual length, and when it stopped at this station the rear coach, in which Mrs. Newsome was riding, did not reach the station platform. In getting off this car Mrs. Newsome was assisted by a flagman, and she avers that by reason of the dangerous character of the place at which she was invited to alight, and the negligence of the flagman who helped her down, her arm and shoulder were wrenched, and that she has suffered much pain in consequence. There was a verdict and judgment in her favor below. This judgment was reversed by the Court of Civil Appeals, on account of a certain instruction given to the jury by the trial judge, which the Court of Civil Appeals held erroneous.

The railway company denied that the place at which Mrs. Newsome alighted was in any sense a dangerous place. While it was conceded that she did not get off at the platform, the employés of the railway company testified that the place where she did get down was a level and well-beaten path in easy distance of the car steps. Mrs. Newsome testified that the place was sloping and rocky, and that the flagman who aided her roughly grasped her arm. The flagman denied that he was rough or failed to exercise all proper care in aiding her.

The trial judge submitted to the jury the issue as to the character of the place at which the plaintiff below alighted.

When he came to charge on the question of the assistance rendered to this lady by the flagman, his honor used the language for which the Court of Civil Appeals directed a new trial:

"If the greater weight of the proof, gentlemen of the jury further shows you that an agent of the defendant company the flagman, undertook to assist this plaintiff when she was a passenger to alight there at

...