Southern R. Co. v. Vandergriff

• Decision Date: 21 September 1901
• Parties: SOUTHERN RY. CO. v. VANDERGRIFF.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

64 S.W. 481

108 Tenn. 14

SOUTHERN RY. CO. v. VANDERGRIFF.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

September 21, 1901

Appeal from circuit court, Union county; W. R. Hicks, Judge.

Action by James Vandergriff against the Southern Railway Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Jourolmon Welcker & Hudson and D. D. Anderson, for appellant.

Templeton & Carlock and J. O. Sharp, for appellee.

WILKES J.

This is an action for damages for personal injuries. The plaintiff was a passenger, and was thrown from his seat to the floor of the car as the result of a violent jerk of the train, and was injured. The train upon which he was riding was a freight with caboose attached, and he was in the caboose with other passengers by consent of the company. The evidence is that freight cars are jerked in moving and stopping with much more violence than passenger coaches. It is also very plain from the record that the jerk which caused the fall and injury in this case was much more violent than usual, even in a freight train, and was noticed by all the passengers and conductor. The conductor remarked with an oath that he did not see what the brakeman meant by putting on the brakes so hard. Hon John P. Rogers, who was a passenger, states that he was standing up, holding to the door with a tight grip, and all at once the train gave a violent and sudden jerk, and he fell also. He says: "It was an unusually hard jerk. *** The train came to a sudden stop. It was not an ordinary jerk or lurch. I thought there was a collision. I was thrown on my back. I have never experienced such a jerk before or since." The evidence tends to show that plaintiff was ruptured by the shock or fall, or both. He became very sick and went to bed, has not been able to work since, and is permanently injured. The tendency of his injury, as stated by the physician, is to grow worse with time. There was a verdict for plaintiff for $1,000. There was a remittitur of $250, and judgment for $750 and costs. The railroad company has appealed, and assigned as error that there is no evidence to support the verdict. We think the assignment not well made. The plaintiff was on the caboose at the invitation and by the consent of the railroad company, and had paid his fare. It was to be expected that the jerks and lurches of the freight train would be more severe than that of a passenger train, but, having accepted passengers upon such a...