Stamey v. Southern Ry. Co

Decision Date01 November 1935
Docket NumberNo. 382.,382.
Citation182 S.E. 130,208 N.C. 668
PartiesSTAMEY. v. SOUTHERN RY. CO.
CourtNorth Carolina Supreme Court

Appeal from Superior Court, Iredell County; Sink, Judge.

Action by Julia Ann Stamey against Southern Railway Company. From a judgment of nonsuit, plaintiff appeals.

Affirmed.

Civil action to recover damages for alleged negligent injury.

On December 27, 1933, the plaintiff and her companions, Eula Moore and Daisy Stamey, were passengers on defendant's train going from Statesville to Catawba, a distance of about twelve miles. As the train approached Catawba Station, the plaintiff and her companions left their seats and went to the end of the car preparatory to leaving the train when it stopped.

Eula Moore testified for the plaintiff, in part, as follows: "I had made the trip lots of times and was familiar with the fact that Catawba was a flag-stop. * * * As the train drew into the station yard, and as our coach was coming under the overhead bridge, about 150 feet east of the station, I left my seat and walked near the door and was standing there waiting for the train to come to a dead standstill so we could walk around and go down the steps. The train was slowing down kinder as it passed under the bridge. * * * Our coach was about 250 feet west of the station and about fifteen feet beyond the end of the raised gravel when we got off. * * * I got off just like if the train was standing still. The train was moving a tiny bit faster but it was moving along slowly. * * * No one was in sight at the time we got off, neither the conductor, the flagman, or any other employee of the railroad. * * * The train did not stop. It was going along slow but never did come to a standstill. We thought we could get off without being hurt and that is what we did."

From a judgment of nonsuit entered at the close of plaintiff's evidence, she appeals, assigning errors.

John W. Wallace, Andrew C. Mcintosh, and John R. McLaughlin, all of Statesville, for appellant.

R. C. Kelly, of Greensboro, Jack Joyn-er, of Statesville, and W. C. Feimster, of Newton, for appellee.

STACY, Chief Justice.

A passenger on a moving train is not justified in jumping therefrom to his injury by the mere fact that he is being-carried by or beyond his station. Carter v. Seaboard A. L. R. Co., 165 N. C. 244, 81 S. E. 321. The general rule is that a passenger who is injured while alighting from a moving train may not recover for such injuries. Burgin v. Richmond R. Co., 115 N. C. 673, 20 S. E. 473; ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 cases
  • Smith v. Sink
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 30 Junio 1937
    ......When contributory negligence is established by plaintiff's own evidence. Wright v. Grocery Co., 210 N.C. 462, 187 S.E. 564;. Stamey v. R. R., 208 N.C. 668, 182 S.E. 130; Tart v. R. R., 202 N.C. 52, 161 S.E. 720; Scott v. Tel. Co., 198 N.C. 795, 153 S.E. 413; Davis v. ......
  • Smith v. Sink
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 30 Junio 1937
    ......Stamey v. R. R., 208 N.C. 668, 182 S.E. 130; Tart v. R. R., 202 N.C. 52, 161 S.E. 720;. Scott v. Tel. Co., 198 N.C. 795, 153 S.E. 413;. Davis v. ......
  • Hollingsworth v. Burns
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 29 Abril 1936
    ......300,. 53 S.E. 891, 896, 7 L.R.A. (N.S.) 335, 8 Ann.Cas. 638;. Alexander v. City of Statesville, 165 N.C. 527, 81. S.E. 763: Fry v. Southern Public Utilities Co., 183. N.C. 281, 111 S.E. 354; Ghorley v. Atlanta & C. A. L. R. Co., 189 N.C. 634, 127 S.E. 634; Hoggard v. Atlantic. Coast ... Lincoln v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 207 N.C. 787,. 178 S.E. 601. He says he knowingly took a chance and lost. Stamey v. Southern R. Co., 208 N.C. 668, 182 S.E. 130. The judge so stated in charging the jury, but left it to. them to say what its effect should be, ......
  • Hollingsworth v. Burns
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of North Carolina
    • 29 Abril 1936
    ......300, 53 S.E. 891, 896, 7 L.R.A.(N.S.) 335, 8 Ann.Cas. 638; Alexander v. City of Statesville, 165 N.C. 527, 81 S.E. 763: Fry v. Southern Public Utilities Co, 183 N.C. 281, 111 S.E. 354; Ghorley v. Atlanta & C. A. L. R. Co, 189 N.C. 634, 127 S.E. 634; Hoggard v. Atlantic Coast Line ...Lincoln v. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co., 207 N.C. 787, 178 S.E. 601. He says he knowingly took a chance and lost. Stamey v. Southern R. Co., 208 N.C. 668, 182 S.E. 130. The judge so stated in charging the jury, but left it to them to say what its effect should be, ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT