Olson v. Pa. & O. Fuel Co.

• Decision Date: 01 November 1899
• Citation: 80 N.W. 698,77 Minn. 528
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
• Parties: OLSON v. PENNSYLVANIA & O. FUEL CO. et al. SAME v. CHICAGO G. W. RY. CO. et al.

77 Minn. 528

80 N.W. 698

OLSON

v.PENNSYLVANIA & O. FUEL CO. et al.

SAME

v.CHICAGO G. W. RY. CO. et al.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Nov. 1, 1899.

Appeals from district court. St. Louis county; William A. Cant and S. H. Moer, Judges.

Action by Tolef Olson against the Pennsylvania & Ohio Fuel Company and others. From an order overruling a demurrer to the complaint, defendants the Chicago Great Western Railway Company and the Eastern Railway Company of Minnesota appeal. Reversed.

Syllabus by the Court

1. A carrier owning and transferring a car over its own and connecting lines to a shipper for his use owes to him and his servants who must handle the car the duty of exercising due diligence in inspecting and putting the car in a reasonably safe condition for the proposed service; but, if the car be suitable and safe when it leaves the possession and control of such carrier, it has exercised due care in the premises.

2. Complaint herein construed, and held, that it does not state a cause of action against either of the appellants, because it fails to allege that the car by which the plaintiff, a servant of a shipper, was injured, was in an unsafe condition when it left the respective lines of the appellants, or either of them. M. D. Grover, J. A. Murphy, and Wm. R. Begg, for appellant Eastern Ry. Co. of Minnesota.

D. W. Lawler, Davis, Hollister & Hicks, and Henry J. Grannis, for appellant Chicago G. W. Ry. Co.

John Jenswold, Jr., for respondent.

START, C. J.

The here material facts alleged in the complaint herein are these: The defendant fuel company during all the times stated in the complaint owned and operated a coal dock at the city of Duluth, with railroad tracks which were connected with the main tracks of the Duluth Terminal Transfer Railway Company, which were in the control of the defendant Bowles as receiver of such transfer company. During such times the defendant the Chicago Great Western Railway Company was a common carrier of freight and passengers, and owned and operated a railway line in this state, and owned and used a freight car, with others, known as ‘No. 626.’ The defendant the Eastern Railway Company was also during such times a like carrier, and owned and operated a railway line from Hinckley to Duluth, in this state. The defendants other than the fuel company were parties to a traffic arrangement by the terms of which all the cars owned, leased, or operated by any of the parties, which were destined for any point on the railway lien of any of the other parties to the contract, were to be transported and transferred over the connecting lines of the parties to their point of destination at a reasonable compensation, to be settled for between the parties on the basis of a haul load, and under which the servants of such parties were to handle the cars so transferred and transported. Pursuant to such arrangement, the Great Western Railway Company delivered its car No. 626 to a connecting carrier to the plaintiff unknown, to be forwarded to the coal dock of the fuel company, to be there loaded with coal. The Eastern Railway Company received the car upon its line, pursuant to the contract, and delivered it to Bowles, the receiver, who, on the 29th day of September, 1897, transferred it to the coal dock, to be there loaded with coal, and returned over the same connecting lines. That the fastenings and bearings, upon which hung and was moved one of the sides and doors of the car were at that time, and for a long time prior thereto had been, in a defective and unsafe condition, and insufficient to hold the door in place, and by reason thereof the door was liable to come off its bearings, and injure any person who should be engaged in loading or unloading the car, or working thereabouts, and by reason thereof it was imminently...