Vickers v. The Atlanta & West Point R.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 30 September 1879
• Parties: Vickers, by next friend. v. The Atlanta & West Point Railroad Company.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

64 Ga. 306

Vickers, by next friend. v. The Atlanta & West Point Railroad Company.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

(September Term, 1879.)

Railroads. Non-suit. Before Judge Buchanan. Campbell Superior Court. February Term, 1879.

Vickers, by next friend, brought case against the railroad company for a personal injury, laying his damages at $20,000.00. He alleged, in brief, that he was a minor, about ten years of age; that the injury was caused by the negligence of defendant's agents in allowing the plaintiff and others to get on and jump off the cars while in motion; that the engineer who ran the engine that did the injury told the plaintiff to jump on the engine while in motion, and only one or two days before the injury occurred, said engineer put the plaintiff on the engine while in motion, and then and there traded and carried on a traffic with plaintiff for ground-peas, and told him to come back on the day of the injury to get his pay, and it was in accordance with such request that plaintiff returned, and in jumping on the engine while in motion, fell, through which the train ran over his left leg, rendering amputation necessary; that by reason of his tender years he was unable to judge of the danger to himself from such course of conduct.

The facts as sworn to by the plaintiff, made, in substance, this case:

Plaintiff, a little boy between nine and ten years of age, *was in the habit of selling ground-peas, apples, etc., to the passengers and defendant\'s employees on trains as they passed through the town of Fairburn. Martin was passing through such town, running the engine of a train. He called to plaintiff, who was engaged in selling ground-peas. The train was running very fast, but plaintiff responded to his call, and when he reached the engine the brakeman or fireman took his basket up on the tender, and by the time he had climbed up on the engine they had the ground peas measured out. Martin offered him his pay in large bills but did not have any small change. Said he would pay him the next time he came up. When the engine stopped plaintiff got off and returned to the cab. He went to the train the next morning, but Martin did not have the change, said he would bring it the next evening. At the appointed time plaintiff went to get up on the engine as it was moving, his foot slipped and he fell under it and was thus injured. The engine was running fifteen or twenty miles per hour when he sold the ground-peas to Martin, and about fifteen miles per hour when he was hurt. The train ran about one hundred yards after the injury before stopping. Knows now that it is dangerous for boys or men to attempt to get on trains when running fifteen or twenty miles per hour, but did not know it then. He was so small that he did not know anything about the engine.

Much other testimony was introduced, principally as to extent of injury, amount of damage, etc., not deemed material here. On motion of defendant the court ordered a non-suit, and plaintiff excepted.

L. R. Ray; L. H. Featherston; W. F.Wright; L. S. Roan, for plaintiff in error.

N. J. Hammond; Thomas W. Latham, for defendant.

BLECKLEY, Justice.

Non-suit is a process of legal mechanics: the case is choppedoff. Only in a clear, gross case is this mechanical *treatment...