Pride v. Piedmont & N. Ry. Co.
| Decision Date | 27 November 1918 |
| Docket Number | 449. |
| Citation | 97 S.E. 418,176 N.C. 594 |
| Parties | PRIDE ET AL. v. PIEDMONT & N. RY. CO. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Mecklenburg County; Long, Judge.
Action by Cora Pride and another against the Piedmont & Northern Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. New trial.
A carrier is liable for injuries to passengers caused by wrongful acts of strangers, if they could be reasonably anticipated, but is not liable for injuries caused by premature starting of a car due to pulling of bell rope by an intoxicated passenger, where conductor had no knowledge of the intoxication, and such third person had been orderly up to that time.
This is an action to recover damages for personal injury, caused, as is alleged, by the negligence of the defendant.
Defendant owns and operates a line of interurban electric railway between Charlotte and Gastonia, via Rhyne's Station, a regular stop. Plaintiff Cora Pride purchased a ticket from Charlotte to Rhyne's Station and became a passenger upon defendant's train of two cars for that point, leaving Charlotte about 10:30 p. m., December 23, 1916, and duly notified the conductor that she desired to alight at Rhyne's Station. Plaintiff Cora Pride was accompanied by her husband, and when the train came to stop at Rhyne's Station they both proceeded to get off. Just after plaintiff's husband had alighted, and as plaintiff herself was in the act of alighting, the train suddenly and without warning started forward, throwing her violently to the ground whereby she was injured severely, so that she was confined to bed for some time.
Plaintiff testified that the colored porter, Bob Gayden, pulled the bell cord which caused the train to start prematurely, when he knew, or by using his faculties could have known, that she was in the act of descending the car steps. Defendant's witnesses testified that this negro porter had the right to pull the bell cord; that it was part of his duties.
Defendant's witnesses testified that the negro porter did not pull the bell cord and start the train, but that a passenger on the train, whose name is unknown, pulled the cord and started the train.
The only witness who testified that Gayden, the porter, pulled the cord and started the cars was the plaintiff. Gayden, the porter, testified that he did not pull the cord, and was on the ground when the car started, and he was corroborated in this by the conductor, Taylor.
J. M Kendrick, a witness for the defendant, testified as follows to wit:
"I am the deputy sheriff of Gaston county, and was a passenger on the train the night Cora Pride fell out here at Rhyne. I do not recall the name of the man that started the car, but it was a white man, standing right there close to me. He was a passenger in the car, and got off at Mt. Holly. He was on the train from here out there. He was drinking. I saw Bob Gayden on the ground. He was on the ground when the car started.
The man who started the car was under the influence of liquor. If they had been in the car, they could have seen it. The conductor went through taking up tickets. I got after the man about drinking. I was standing up in there. The man was not cutting up any.
No, he had not been giving any trouble before that. When the conductor was passing through the car, he was behaving all right. He had not been disorderly in Mr. Taylor's presence."
The defendant requested his honor to charge the jury as follows:
(1) If you find from the evidence the facts to be that the defendant's train was started by a stranger, without authority from it, you will answer the first issue "No."
His honor refused to give this instruction, and the defendant excepted.
There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant appealed.
Osborne, Cooke & Robinson, of Charlotte, for appellant.
Clarkson, Taliaferro & Clarkson, of Charlotte, for appellees.
Common carriers are held to the highest degree of care for the protection of passengers, and are liable in damages not only for the wrongful acts of their own agents, but for those of strangers, if they could be reasonably anticipated.
The principle is fully recognized in this state in Penny v. Railroad, 153 N.C. 296, 69 S.E. 238, 32 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1209, Stanley v. Railroad, 160 N.C. 323, 76 S.E. 221, and Mills v. Railroad, 172 N.C. 266, 90 S.E. 221, and is correctly stated in brief of counsel for the plaintiff with citation of authority.
"While a common carrier...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Wesley v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 7910SC733
...in the instant case, at least, where the carrier or its servants knew or ought to have known that it was threatened. See Pride v. R.R., 176 N.C. 594, 97 S.E. 418 (1918). We are reluctant to state the rule in its entirety, since we are called on to examine and clarify it at a later point her......
-
Smith v. Camel City Cab Co.
... ... ability to avoid injury to the passenger by the exercise of ... proper care. Pride v. Piedmont R., 176 N.C. 594, 97 ... S.E. 418; Wilson v. Bus Line, 217 N.C. 586, 9 S.E.2d ... 1; Batten v. South & N.A.R., 77 Ala. 591, 54 Am.Rep ... ...