Porter v. Davis

• Decision Date: 19 December 1921
• Docket Number: 10780.
• Parties: PORTER v. DAVIS, AGENT, ET AL.
• Court: South Carolina Supreme Court

110 S.E. 121

118 S.C. 153

PORTER v. DAVIS, AGENT, ET AL.

No. 10780.

Supreme Court of South Carolina

December 19, 1921

Appeal from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Sumter County; Jas. E Peurifoy, Judge.

Action by Harriet N. Porter against James C. Davis, as Agent of the United States of America and Director General of Railroads and another. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Barron McKay, Frierson & McCauts, of Columbia, Reynolds & Reynolds of Sumter, and A. L. Hardee, of Florence, for appellants.

Jennings & Harby and John H. Clifton, both of Sumter, for respondent.

GARY C.J.

The following statement appears in the record:

"This case was begun by service of summons and complaint on the defendants, the 10th day of July, 1919. The action was originally against the Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company and H. M. Tilton, but the complaint was amended before trial by substituting James C. Davis, as Agent of the United States of America and Director General of Railroads, in the place of Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company. In due course trial was had before Hon. James E. Peurifoy, presiding judge and a jury at the spring term of court of common pleas for Sumter county, April, 1921, and a verdict returned by the jury, 'We find for the plaintiff the sum of sixteen thousand dollars." Motion for new trial was made and refused, and defendants duly served notice of intention to appeal to the Supreme Court of South Carolina from the judgment which was duly entered on said verdict."

The complaint, omitting the first paragraph, which is formal, is as follows:

"(2) That plaintiff was a passenger on train of defendant on or about 24th of November, 1918, when said train was wrecked, and plaintiff was thrown violently from her seat, was cut and bruised, and her hand mashed in such manner that one of her fingers had to be amputated. That her leg was bruised and severely injured causing her much pain, suffering and expense for medical treatment, etc., loss of time from her profession, that pains are no better, and plaintiff is informed and believes that she will continue to suffer much pain, expense and loss of time by reason of said injuries.

(3) That defendant Tilton at time in question was in the employ of the defendant company as section master and in charge of that portion of track where wreck occurred.

(4) That wreck was caused and the plaintiff injured and damaged because the defendants negligently, willfully and recklessly failed to keep that portion of the track in repair where the wreck occurred and properly inspect same and detect and remove therefrom a broken and defective rail. That defendant company negligently failed to provide rails of sufficient strength. That the engineer in charge of said train failed to keep proper lookout and failed to detect a broken rail on said track. That defendant company and its agents, in charge of said train, negligently, willfully, etc., ran same at a high rate of speed, thus causing same to depart from the track and break the rails.

(5) That the plaintiff was and still is a trained nurse, without any means to speak of. That she and her two children have to depend upon her earnings. That she is a widow woman. That because of said injuries plaintiff has been and is informed and believes that she will continue to be, incapacitated from following her profession as a trained nurse, and deprived of the means of supporting herself and children.

(6) That above acts and omissions of the defendants were willful, reckless and negligent, and jointly and severally contributed to plaintiff's injury and damage as

...