Southern Pac. Co. v. Craner

• Decision Date: 13 March 1907
• Parties: SOUTHERN PAC. CO. v. CRANER.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

101 S.W. 534

SOUTHERN PAC. CO. v. CRANER.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

March 13, 1907.

On Rehearing, April 24, 1907.

Appeal from District Court, El Paso County; J. M. Goggin, Judge.

Action by G. Wesley Craner against the Southern Pacific Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed. Motion for rehearing overruled.

Beall & Kemp, for appellant. Patterson, Buckler & Woodson, for appellee.

FLY, J.

This is a suit instituted by appellee to recover damages for his unlawful ejection from a train belonging to appellant. Appellant filed its plea of privilege to be sued in Harris county, Tex., alleging that it was a foreign corporation, but had a local agent in Houston, Harris county, Tex., and had no local agent or representative in El Paso county, Tex. The court, after hearing the evidence on the question of venue, overruled the plea of privilege, and on a trial by jury appellee recovered the sum of $335.60. Court instructed a verdict for $35.60, the amount paid out by appellee for a ticket, and the jury found for the additional sum of $300 damages.

The court did not err in overruling the plea of privilege to be sued in Harris county. The facts and circumstances clearly indicate that appellant had agents in El Paso county, and could be sued in that county, and, further, if the evidence did not show that appellant had an agent in El Paso county, there was no local agent or representative in Texas. It failed to show that it had a local agent in Harris county. Proof of the fact that the Southern Pacific Company's Steamship Lines have agents in Texas did not establish the fact that appellant had an agent in Texas. This is held on the theory that the Southern Pacific Steamship Line is a different corporation from the Southern Pacific Company, which it seems was incorporated to build and operate railroads. The facts presented to show that appellant had agents in El Paso county are fully as strong as those in the case in which it was held by the Supreme Court that a district court of Texas had jurisdiction over the Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company (Buie v. Railway, 95 Tex. 51, 65 S. W. 27, 55 L. R. A. 861), and we hold that the district court had jurisdiction over appellant in El Paso county.

The evidence discloses that appellant bought excursion tickets in El Paso from an agent of appellant, from El Paso, Tex., to San Francisco, Cal., and return, for himself and wife, and they went to the latter place, where the tickets were validated for the return trip. On the way back appellee and wife stopped off in Los Angeles; and, as required by the conditions on the tickets, deposited them with the agent of appellant. When appellee desired to return, he obtained his ticket from the agent and got on a train of appellant, and took his seat in the sleeping coach. His wife remained in Los Angeles. Perhaps 10 minutes after the train had started out of Los Angeles a train agent of appellant demanded a ticket from appellee, and, when it was shown him, he declared that appellee was not the man named in the ticket. Appellee showed him his initials in his hat, and offered to go into the baggage car with him and open his trunk and show books in which his name was written, and also told the agent that he could telegraph to Los Angeles and find that his wife's ticket, with a number next to his, was on deposit there. The train agent took up the ticket, and gave a receipt for it. Appellee wrote his name several times for the train agent. Afterwards the conductor came into the car and demanded a ticket, and appellee told him the train agent had taken it and had given him a receipt, which was exhibited to the conductor. When the train reached Ontario, a small station, the conductor told appellee to go with him, and, when they got into the vestibule of the car, took appellee by the coat collar and pushed him off the train. Appellee ran at once to the ticket office and asked for a ticket, but was told by the agent that he did not have time to sell it. Appellee was compelled to stay over until another train came along, to which no sleeping coach was attached. He paid $25.60 for another ticket to El Paso. Appellee testified that the train agent spoke roughly and boisterously, and the conductor evicted him by force. This was done in the presence of other passengers. The occurrence so affected appellee's nerves for several months that he had to take treatment from a physician. The eagerness of the train agent to take up the tickets was accounted for by the fact that he got a reward for every scalper's ticket he took up.

Under the above facts we do not think the verdict of the jury was excessive. The facts show...