Taliferro v. Western Union Tel. Co.

• Decision Date: 04 January 1900
• Parties: TALIFERRO v. WESTERN UNION TEL. CO. [1]
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

54 S.W. 825

TALIFERRO v. WESTERN UNION TEL. CO. ^[1]

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

January 4, 1900

Appeal from circuit court, Daviess county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Claude Taliferro against the Western Union Telegraph Company to recover damages for failure to deliver a telegram. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Reversed.

Birkhead & Clements, for appellant.

Richards Baskin & Ronald, Geo. H. Fearons, and Ellis & Sweeney, for appellee.

HOBSON J.

On April 9, 1898, appellant received a telegram notifying him that his sister was dangerously ill. On the next day he sent over appellee's line from Muncie, Ind., the following "To Mr. J. C. Taliferro, Owensboro, Ky.: Telegram received. How is sister now? Wire answer." He paid appellee 40 cents for sending the telegram, which was not delivered. He filed this suit to recover damages, alleging that the message might by ordinary diligence have been delivered in time for him to have received the information concerning his sister's condition by 10 o'clock that day; that his sister was then dead; that he desired very much to see her and be with his father and mother before she was buried; that she was buried the next day at Owensboro, and if the telegram had been delivered it would have been answered in ample time for him to have come to Owensboro before she was buried; and that by reason of the negligence of the appellee in not delivering the telegram at all he had been deprived of being with his family after the death of his sister, or being present at the funeral, from which he suffered great grief and mental anguish. To this petition the court below sustained a demurrer. Two amendments were filed, stating the facts more fully; and, the court having sustained a demurrer to the petition as amended, appellant declined to plead further, and his action was dismissed.

The question raised on the appeal is whether appellant can recover of appellee for his grief and mental suffering in not reaching his home or learning of his sister's death before she was buried. It will be observed that his telegram was only an inquiry. It may be that, if his telegram had been received, in the confusion of the household an answer might not have been sent, or, if sent, by some miscarriage, without fault of appellee, it might never have reached appellant. Legal damages are such as directly and naturally result from the wrongful act complained of. In Telegraph Co. v Linn, 87 Tex. 7, 26 S.W. 490, this message was sent, and not delivered: "Grace is very low. Can you come and bring Maude?" The court, after stating the rule that the party who does a wrongful act is not liable for the act of a third person which is not the natural result of such wrongful act, adds: "Nor will a telegraph company be held liable for results that might have been avoided by action to be taken by the party himself or some third person, unless such action is called for as a natural consequence of the information contained, and the action such as in the course of events would naturally follow upon the information given by the message. *** In any event, the damages claimed are not the proximate result of the failure to...