Sanderson v. Northern Pacific Railway Company
| Decision Date | 26 December 1902 |
| Docket Number | 13,307 - (148) |
| Citation | 92 N.W. 542,88 Minn. 162 |
| Parties | CAROLINE SANDERSON v. NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY; A. W. SANDERSON v. SAME |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Separate actions in the district court for Ramsey county, the first, by Caroline Sanderson to recover $2,000 for personal injuries; the second, by A. W. Sanderson to recover $2,040 for injuries resulting from the sickness and suffering of his wife, plaintiff in the first case, and for breach of contract for the transportation of himself and family. The causes of action in both cases arose from the alleged wrongful act of defendant's train conductor in forcibly ejecting or attempting to eject plaintiffs' two minor children from defendant's railway train and in compelling plaintiff A W. Sanderson to purchase tickets for their transportation. The cases were tried together before Otis, J., and a jury. In the case of Caroline Sanderson the court directed a verdict for defendant. In the case of A. W. Sanderson a verdict was rendered in favor of plaintiff for $42. From an order granting a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict in the case of A. W. Sanderson, and from an order denying a motion for a new trial in the case of Caroline Sanderson plaintiffs appealed. Appeal of A. W. Sanderson dismissed. In appeal of Caroline Sanderson, order affirmed.
Appealable Order.
No appeal lies from an order granting a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
Damages for Fright.
There can be no recovery for fright which results in physical injuries, in the absence of contemporaneous injury to the plaintiff, unless the fright is the proximate result of a legal wrong against the plaintiff by the defendant.
Charles Butts, for appellants.
C. W. Bunn and L. T. Chamberlain, for respondent.
The plaintiff A. W. Sanderson on May 7, 1900, with his wife, Caroline Sanderson, and their four children, aged respectively four, six, eight, and twelve years, boarded one of the passenger trains of the Omaha Railway at Rice Lake, in the state of Wisconsin, for the purpose of going to St. Paul, and thence over the Northern Pacific Railway to Cedro, in the state of Washington. The father and mother each had a full through ticket, and the child twelve years of age, a boy, had a through half-fare ticket. The tickets were purchased of the station agent at Rice Lake. The party transferred to the defendant's passenger train at St. Paul. Before the train reached Minneapolis, the conductor took up the tickets of the plaintiff and his wife, and the half-fare ticket of the boy, and demanded half-fare tickets for the other two children who were over five years old, or the payment of $40, the price thereof. The father declined to pay any fare for the two children, for the reason, as he stated to the conductor, that he had an agreement with the agent when he purchased the tickets that the price paid therefor should entitle him and his family to be carried to their destination. The conductor upon such refusal caused the child eight years old, a boy, to be put off the car at Minneapolis, but he immediately returned into the car. The conductor attempted to get hold of the six year old child, a girl, to put her off, who was in a seat with her mother. In such attempt it is alleged that the conductor assaulted the mother, and that she was frightened by what took place in the attempt to remove the children from the car, whereby her health was seriously impaired. The father paid the $40 demanded, to avoid further trouble, and the party were carried to their destination. The conductor did not tender back any of the tickets which he had taken up.
The father and mother each brought an action in the district court of Ramsey county against the defendant for damages which each claimed to have sustained by reason of the premises. The action of A. W. Sanderson was brought for the recovery of damages in the sum of $2,040, which he alleged he sustained on account of the $40 paid, and the loss of the services and society of his wife, and for medical treatment for her, all of which were due to the injuries she received by reason of the wrongful act of the conductor. The action of Caroline Sanderson, the wife, was brought to recover damages in the sum of $2,000 on account of personal injuries sustained by the alleged assault made upon her by the conductor, and by reason of fright and shock due to the attempt to separate her children from her. The parties stipulated to try the cases at the same time and upon the same evidence, and that one record should cover both cases, but each should be separately submitted to the jury.
The trial court at the close of the evidence directed a verdict for the defendant in the case of Caroline Sanderson, and she appealed to this court from an order denying her motion for a new trial. The case of A. W. Sanderson was submitted to the jury, and a verdict was returned in his favor for $42; being the sum paid to the conductor, and interest. Thereupon the defendant made a motion for judgment in its favor notwithstanding the verdict, and the court made its order granting the motion, from which the plaintiff appealed. The plaintiff made a separate motion for a new trial, but the record discloses no order disposing of it, and the only appeal on his part is from the order granting the defendant's motion for judgment.
1. An order granting or denying a motion for judgment is not appealable, for such an order is simply one for a judgment, or one refusing it. McMahon v. Davidson, 12 Minn. 232 (357); Rogers v. Holyoke, 14 Minn. 387 (514); St. Anthony Falls Bank v. Graham, 67 Minn. 318, 69 N.W. 1077; Oelschlegel v. Chicago Great Western Ry. Co., 71 Minn. 50, 73 N.W. 631; Kalz v. Winona & St. Peter Ry. Co., 76 Minn. 351, 79 N.W. 310. Therefore the appeal in the case of A. W. Sanderson must be, and is, dismissed.
2. The question to be determined on the appeal of Mrs. Sanderson hereafter designated as the plaintiff, is whether the evidence tends to show any legal basis for the recovery of damages by her. The evidence relevant to her case tends to show that her husband was on the train with and in charge of his family, and that he made the arrangements for their transportation, and that the station agent of...
To continue reading
Request your trial