Thompson v. St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co.

• Decision Date: 31 May 1912
• Citation: 148 S.W. 484
• Parties: THOMPSON v. ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RY. CO.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

148 S.W. 484

THOMPSON v. ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RY. CO.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

May 31, 1912.

1. RAILROADS (§ 282)—INJURIES AT STATION —SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE.

In an action against a railroad company for personal injuries by being struck by a swinging car door while plaintiff was on defendant's station platform, evidence held to sustain a finding that plaintiff was injured in the manner claimed.

2. RAILROADS (§ 282)—INJURIES AT STATION —SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE.

In an action against a railroad company for personal injuries by being struck by a swinging door while plaintiff was on defendant's station platform, evidence held to sustain a finding of negligence by the company causing the injury.

3. EVIDENCE (§ 80) — PRESUMPTIONS — LAW OF THE STATE.

Where the law of the state in which the personal injuries were received is not pleaded, the law of Missouri will be taken as controlling in an action in this state.

4. RAILROADS (§ 274)—INJURIES TO LICENSEES —USE OF PLATFORM.

Railroad companies must take notice of conditions created by the use of their platforms and stations by the public with their expressed or implied encouragement and permission, and use reasonable care to avoid injury to those so using their premises.

5. NEGLIGENCE (§ 121)—"RES IPSA LOQUITUR" DOCTRINE—FOUNDATION.

The res ipsa loquitur doctrine is based upon the idea that every apparent injury which may only be explained by facts within the peculiar knowledge of the wrongdoer carries with it proof of its wrongful character requiring the wrongdoer to show a just excuse.

6. RAILROADS (§ 282)—RES IPSA LOQUITUR DOCTRINE.

Evidence that a railroad company ran its trains along a platform which was generally used by the public with its acquiescence and permission for travel as well as for business, and that a loose car door swinging over the platform so as to be dangerous to persons walking thereon struck plaintiff, made out a prima facie case of negligence under the res ipsa loquitur doctrine, and places the burden on the railroad company to explain it.

7. RAILROADS (§ 282)—INJURIES AT STATION —INSTRUCTIONS.

In an action against a railroad company for personal injuries by being struck by a swinging car door while plaintiff was rightfully on defendant's platform, the conductor of the train testified that while his train was standing in the yard north of the station just before the accident he walked along the side on which the accident occurred from the rear to the front of the engine and examined the car door fastening, and afterwards, when the train started, stood on the same side, and examined the car doors as they passed him to see if the doors were properly closed and sealed, and that the doors of all the cars which were loaded were in apparent good order. Held, that a requested instruction that, if the accident could not have been guarded against by the exercise of reasonable care and prudence by defendant, the jury should find for it, should have been given, and it was error to authorize an instruction merely upon plaintiff's evidence of the defective condition of the car door and the resulting injury.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Stoddard County; J. L. Fort, Judge.

Action by Leander Thompson against the St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

This is a suit for damages on account of personal injuries which are alleged to have been received by plaintiff at the joint passenger station of defendant and the St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Company at the city of Paragould, Ark. The petition states that while he was lawfully there, walking at the side of defendant's track, he was struck by the door of one of defendant's freight cars in a passing train; that the door had been negligently permitted by the defendant to project and swing a considerable distance outward from the side of the car, so that it struck him and pulled him along with the moving car for several yards, and violently threw him into and against a mass of iron and track rails negligently and wrongfully left by defendant where the public were accustomed to travel and to get off the cars at the station, thereby throwing him to the ground and under the moving train, which ran over his right arm, crushing and mangling it so that it had to be amputated at the shoulder. Judgment is asked for $15,000. The answer was a general denial and a plea of contributory negligence. The following plat of the vicinity where the accident occurred will be of assistance in understanding the facts:

NOTE: OPINION CONTAINING TABLE OR OTHER DATA THAT IS NOT VIEWABLE

The station building, a little over 156 feet long and 30 feet wide, contains, in the order named from north to south, the waiting rooms of the railway companies, the ticket offices, and the colored waiting rooms, all of which occupy perhaps two-thirds of the length of the building, then a hall or passage about 12 feet wide running through the building from east to west, next the baggage rooms, and at the south end the office of the Pacific Express Company, which is occupied by it under a lease from the owners of the station. On the east or defendant's side of the building, near the south end, is a double sliding door of the express office. Opposite it on the Iron Mountain side is a similar door through one of the sliding parts of which a smaller door had been cut by the express company. The express company had four trucks for the handling of its traffic, and the railroad companies from four to six for baggage. These last were frequently stored in the passage when not in use. The entire space occupied by the railroad companies around the station building and south between the tracks of the two companies was paved with crushed stone. This was kept smooth and in good condition, and constituted the only platform of the station. It was not only used for the purposes incident to the handling of the passenger and express business of the railways, but also for the passage of the general public backwards and forwards between Main street on the north and Garland avenue on the south, and even beyond Garland avenue. A well-worn path extended along the west side of the defendant's tracks upon this pavement and entered Garland avenue on a wooden walk built across the ditch. Passenger trains running north over defendant's road usually stopped with the locomotive obstructing Main street, and the train extended about 350 feet to the south. The passengers entered and alighted from the cars on that portion of the pavement between the avenue and the south end of the station. There was no witness to the accident except the plaintiff himself, and Orville Thompson, a younger brother, 27 years of age. The two together left the Thompson store on the east side of Pruett street, some distance north of Main, at some time from 9 to half past 9 o'clock in the evening, to go to their father's house, which was on the north side of Main street, a little more than a block east of the depot. Going down Pruett street, they stopped at Empfield's jewelry store some 10 or 15 minutes, then went on to a restaurant, where they stopped a few minutes and ate some chili, then went on to Main street, where the plaintiff stopped and talked with Mr. Jackson, while Orville went on to the northeast corner of the depot and waited for him. At this time a freight train of defendant, called in the evidence "second 15," consisting of 41 loads with its engine and caboose, stood immediately north of Main street where it waited on a side track to permit the passage of a north-bound passenger train (No. 2) which it met at that point. At this time the Thompsons were seen on Main street near the depot by Mr. Wright, a witness introduced by defendant apparently to prove that fact. Second 15 pulled out for the south at 10:35; its movement hiding the Thompsons from Mr. Wright's view. Up to this time there is no dispute as to the facts, and it is also admitted that Orville Thompson then had a package of whisky in the express office for delivery which he did not receive until the next day.

They say that Orville had told the plaintiff of this whisky, and that they started down to the express office on the east side of the station to get it, and that as they started the train had also started, and was pulling along opposite them. When they got to the door of the express office, they knocked, and, no one answering, they started around the south end of the station to go to the door on the Iron Mountain side, making a considerable detour to go around some trucks and a telephone pole at the southeast corner of the building. This brought them pretty close to the train, and, before they turned away from it again, something hit the plaintiff on his head or back, which proved to be a loose and swinging door hanging by its upper left corner alone. Plaintiff became entangled in or attached to this door, and was carried forward so that, as the train increased its speed, Orville, who was all the time trying to pull him loose from the door was compelled to run to keep up with it. Finally they reached the point in Garland avenue shown on the map by crosses where two or three steel rails and some angle bars were lying, over which the plaintiff stumbled, coming loose from the car door, and fell so that his right arm extended across the rail, and was run over and crushed by the wheels. The entire dispute as to facts is included within the time that elapsed after they left Main street to the consummation of the injury. Orville, after extricating plaintiff from beneath the train, went back to the east door of the express office, and knocked, and Mr. Barton, the agent of the express company, Mr. Martindale its transfer clerk, Mr. Newberry, the town marshal, and Mr. Crowell were in. To use the words of Mr. Barton in his testimony, he "knocked like everything," and commenced calling, and Mr. Barton rushed to the door...