St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company v. Woodruff

• Decision Date: 18 January 1909
• Citation: 115 S.W. 953,89 Ark. 9
• Parties: ST. LOUIS, IRON MOUNTAIN & SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. WOODRUFF
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

115 S.W. 953

89 Ark. 9

ST. LOUIS, IRON MOUNTAIN & SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY v. WOODRUFF

Supreme Court of Arkansas

January 18, 1909

Appeal from Clark Circuit Court; Frederick D. Fulkerson, Judge on Exchange of Circuits; affirmed on remittitur.

STATEMENT BY THE COURT.

Appellee sued appellant, alleging that she was a passenger on appellant's road from Memphis, Tennessee, to Cleburne Texas; that while en route appellee became temporarily insane and was unable to care for and protect herself; that appellant, in wanton disregard of appellee's rights as a passenger, did unlawfully, wrongfully and with force and violence, against appellee's protests, eject her from its train at Arkadelphia, about the hour of midnight, when it was dark, and did then and there, to the great wrong, injury and damage to appellee, leave her wholly among strangers, without making any proper provision for her protection, comfort, and personal safety; that appellant's employees knew at the time that appellee was ill and in a helpless condition. The complaint further alleged as follows: "That, being left at said station in such condition, plaintiff remained there until a late hour in the afternoon of next day, during all of which time she continued to be ill and temporarily insane without mental capacity to care or provide for herself; that while she remained at said station she wandered about the premises and grounds, and for want of capacity to take care of herself she several times stumbled and fell upon piles of freight or other obstacles in her course, which caused her to suffer wounds and bruises to her person, and from the effects of which said wounds and bruises plaintiff suffered much physical pain and for a long time thereafter; that as a result from such wrongful expulsion plaintiff was wrongfully detained on her journey for the space of twelve hours or more among entire strangers and without a comfortable place to lodge or rest, and suffered great mental pain and anguish." Prayed judgment for $ 7,000 compensatory damages, and $ 1,000 punitive damages.

The answer specifically denied all the material allegations of the complaint.

Appellee a lady sixty-seven years of age, was a passenger on appellant's train from Memphis, Tennessee, to Cleburne Texas. She was sane when she took passage at Memphis, but after leaving Little Rock, she became temporarily insane. Her conduct became more and more annoying to the other passengers. The conductor and others on the train endeavored to quiet and restrain her, but finally her speech and manner became so obscene, violent and obnoxious to the other passengers that the conductor at Malvern sent a message to the trainmaster asking what he should do. The trainmaster answered: "If passenger referred to is annoying passengers and can not be controlled, return her transportation and put her off at Arkadelphia, advising." At Arkadelphia they put her off. She refused to get off, and two or three of the trainmen took her up by the arms and forced her off. They lifted her off and carried her into the station, using no more force than was necessary. She was put in the waiting room for the whites. It was a new depot, and a nice waiting room provided with seats for passengers, but none on which they could recline. It was about eleven o'clock at night. Those who put her off saw no other employee there except the night operator, and they turned her over to him and told him to take care of her; but he says, when she came that night, he asked her if there was anything he could do for her. "She cursed him and told him to get out, and he went out the office window then."

Another witness says, after she was carried into the station, he "saw the night operator at the window, asked where he was going, and he said "he was leaving;" didn't see any one left there with her.

The sheriff of the county testified in part as follows:

"Two drummers came to my house after the train went south that night, and told me that an old woman was put off the train by force, that she was raving, and would probably wander out and be drowned in the rice pond near by; that she was in a condition to do so unless somebody looked after her. I told them it was not my special duty, but for humanity's sake I would do so. I went down there, found her standing across the window sill with one leg out; * * * half a dozen boys standing on the outside talking back and forth with her. * * * She was abusing them, and I made them go away. There was no one else there but the night operator, who was looking through the window, until the night watchman came down a while. * * * She said she was awful tired, and I went back to the house and got some blankets and a pillow, carried them down and made her a bed of them on the floor, and she laid down, but after three-fourths of an hour she got up and said she was too tired to lie down. * * * She was insane. * * * Next morning told Clark [the agent] he would have to make some arrangement for her, and he asked me what she was doing there. * * * There was no one at the station when he got there that night except the operator, and he was on the outside. There are about four thousand inhabitants in Arkadelphia. * * * Said he stayed with the woman all night. There was no seat in the station upon which the woman could recline. The only furniture in the waiting room was seats and a stove. * * * The operator was sometimes in his room and sometimes out. I had some talk with the operator in charge of the depot, and he said he was glad I came to take charge of the woman, that "she could take charge of the whole damned thing, so far as he was concerned.'"

Another witness testified that he was at the depot early next morning when the sheriff was giving her breakfast, and was with the appellee an hour or more after he left, that she kept wandering around through the baggage room and one place and then another. Witness helped her up four times when she fell. After this witness left, the city marshal took charge of her. He detailed her conduct after he took her in charge, showing that she was insane. He and a gentleman whom he asked to assist him kept her till the train came. They took her into the baggage room to restrain her. She tried to get away, and would bite and scratch. When the passenger train came, going to Texas, they lifted her upon the train, put her in charge of the trainmen, who promised to look after her. She arrived at Cleburne, Texas, where her son lived. She was brought to her son's place of business by a friend of his. Her mental condition was still abnormal. She had an abrasion on her wrist, and complained of bruises on her body. Complained of her back, hips and arm. She suffered that way for a couple of weeks after she got to his home, and was confined to her bed a couple of days.

Appellant excepted to various rulings of the court in giving and refusing requests for instructions. It will be unnecessary to set all these out, but such as we desire to comment on specifically will be stated in the opinion.

Appellee's counsel, in his closing argument, used this language. "They could have arranged for a physician for plaintiff. * * * They could have provided a cot for plaintiff to have rested or lain upon." To this appellant objected, and excepted to the ruling of the court.

From a verdict and judgment for $ 1000 this appeal has been duly prosecuted.

Judgment affirmed.

T. M. Mehaffy and E. B. Kinsworthy, for appellant.

1. Appellant not only had the right, but it was its duty, to eject appellee from its train if she became insane, and, as set out in the seventh and tenth instructions given at appellant's request, it was not liable for any injury except such as she may have received after being left at Arkadelphia. 54 F. 122. The court's first instruction was in conflict with these instructions, and was erroneous in allowing the jury to award damages for injuries, if any, received on the train. Moreover, it is not the case that whenever the danger increases the care should increase, unless the appellant knew, or should have known, of the increased danger. 59 Ark. 180.

2. If the second instruction was intended to cover the time appellee was in the depot at Arkadelphia, it was erroneous in requiring the exercise by appellant of the highest degree of care. It is conceded that appellant's duty did not end with the removal of appellee from the train, but after her removal it was only under the duty to exercise reasonable and ordinary care to provide temporarily for her protection and comfort. 33 Kan. 543; 54 F. 122; Hutchinson on Car., 1119, 1143; 67 Kan. 515.

3. Appellant had the right to turn the appellee over to State authorities, and the jury should have been instructed that appellant was not liable for any injury received by her after the sheriff took charge of her. 54 F. 122; Kirby's Digest, §§ 7754, 4049.

4. Where undisputed facts develop in case which should prevent the plaintiff from recovering, the court should give a peremptory instruction for the defendant. 84 Ark. 57; 82 Ark. 86. Here it is not disputed that no more force was used to eject appellee from the train than was reasonably necessary; that the train reached Arkadelphia between eleven and twelve o'clock at night, and that before twelve o'clock the sheriff had charge of her, appellee in the meantime remaining in the waiting room. The only evidence of any injury places the time of its occurrence as early in the morning, while she was in charge of the sheriff.

5. The second instruction requested by appellant should have been given as asked; as amended by the court by inserting the work "or a material part," it was rendered erroneous. 37 Ark. 589.

6. The verdict was excessive. Under instructions given the verdict could properly be predicated on...