Vinson v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.

• Decision Date: 14 May 1914
• Docket Number: 766
• Citation: 188 Ala. 292,66 So. 100
• Parties: VINSON v. SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

66 So. 100

188 Ala. 292

VINSON v. SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE & TELEGRAPH CO.

No. 766

Supreme Court of Alabama

May 14, 1914

Rehearing Denied June 24, 1914

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cullman County; D.W. Speake, Judge.

Action by J.T. Vinson against the Southern Bell Telephone &amp Telegraph Company. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed and remanded.

The following is the complaint:

Count 2: "Plaintiff claims of defendant $1,999 as damages, for that heretofore, on, to wit, July 17, 1911 defendant was engaged in the business of operating a public telephone system, serving the public for hire or reward in the transmission of oral messages by means of telephony, and on the day and date aforesaid, and for a long time prior thereto, plaintiff was a patron of said defendant, and plaintiff had installed in his residence near Cullman, Ala a telephone for his use and for which it charged him the sum of $1.50 per month, and defendant was under a duty to give plaintiff telephone service with the inhabitants of Cullman Ala., who had telephones installed in their places of business and places of residence, and to connect plaintiff's said telephone with the telephones of other patrons in Cullman county, when plaintiff called therefor by ringing said central office and requesting that he be connected with such telephone, and on the day and date aforesaid plaintiff's minor son suffering from his said injuries, and in a very critical condition, and in danger of dying, the plaintiff, through his wife as his agent, had arranged with his family physician, who was a patron of defendant, and had a telephone installed in his residence that if his services were needed to attend plaintiff's said minor son, that he would be called over the telephone during the night, and said physician had agreed to answer said call at once, and thereupon plaintiff, through his agent or servant, informed defendant's agents or servants in said central office in Cullman, Ala., of the condition of his said son, and the arrangements with his said physician; and thereafter, during the evening, the condition of plaintiff's minor son became more critical, and, desiring to call his said physician, he made repeated efforts to secure connection with his said family physician over the telephone by ringing said central office, and the agents or servants of said defendant in said central office so negligently conducted themselves in and about giving plaintiff said connection that he failed to secure the same and thereby failed to get in communication with his said family physician, and was forced, in order to procure the services and attendance of said physician, to leave the bedside of his son, and to walk and run all the way from his residence, to wit, about one mile and a half, to the residence of his said family physician, and during plaintiff's absence his son died. Plaintiff was damaged, in that he was required to pay for the services of said telephone, that he had to expend great physical energy and exertion in procuring the presence of said physician by running from his home to the residence of said physician, one mile and a half, that he suffered great mental anguish because of not being able to procure said physician to attend to his son, and in being absent from his son at the time of his death, and that he suffered great physical pain and exhaustion because of having to run for said doctor, as aforesaid, all of which said damages he claims in this case. The plaintiff avers that said damages and injury were caused by reason and as a proximate consequence of the negligence of defendant's agents or servants or employés in and about conducting said telephone business, to plaintiff's damage in the sum aforesaid."

Count 3: Same as count 2, down to and including the following words: "All of which damages he claims in this case"--and adds the following: "Plaintiff avers that his said damages and injuries were caused by reason and as a proximate consequence of the negligence of said defendant in failing to have in the conduct of its said business, reasonably competent and efficient employes in said central office, to plaintiff's damage as aforesaid."

Count 4: "Plaintiff claims of defendant $1,999 as damages, for that heretofore, to wit, on July 17, 1911, defendant was engaged in the business of operating a public telephone system, serving the public for hire or reward in the transmission of oral messages by means of telephony, and on the day and date aforesaid, and for a long time prior thereto, plaintiff was a patron of said defendant, and plaintiff had installed in his residence near Cullman, Ala., a telephone for his use, and for which it charged him the sum of $1.50 per month, and defendant engaged to render plaintiff telephone service by giving connection with all other phones in Cullman, Ala., and to connect plaintiff's said telephone with the telephones of other patrons in Cullman county, when plaintiff called therefor by ringing said central office and requesting that he be connected with such telephone; and on the day and date aforesaid, plaintiff's minor son, one Irving Vinson, was seriously injured, and was lying at plaintiff's home, suffering from his said injuries, and in a very critical condition, and in danger of dying, and plaintiff, through his wife as his agent, had arranged with his family physician, who was a patron of defendant, and had a telephone installed in his residence, that if his services were needed to attend plaintiff's said minor son that he would be called over the telephone during the night, and said physician had agreed to answer said call at once, and thereupon, through his agent or servant, informed defendant's agents or servants in said central office in Cullman, Ala., of the condition of his said son, and the arrangements with his said physician, and thereafter during the evening the condition of plaintiff's minor son became

more critical, and, desiring to call his said physician, he made repeated efforts to secure connection with his said family physician over the telephone by ringing said central office, and the agents or servants of said defendant, in said central office so negligently conducted themselves in and about giving plaintiff said connection that he failed to secure the same, and thereby failed to get in communication with his said family physician, and was forced, in order to procure the service and attendance of said physician, to leave the bedside of his son and to walk and run all the way from his residence, to wit, about one mile and a half, to the residence of his said family physician, and was greatly delayed in securing the services of his said family physician, and during plaintiff's absence his son died; and plaintiff avers that he was damaged, in this: He paid the regular monthly tolls for the use of said phone, that he had to expend great physical energy in going after said doctor, and was greatly exhausted, and suffered great mental anguish on account of not being able to procure said physician, and on account of having to be away from his said son during his last illness. Plaintiff avers that the cause of action herein stated grew out of the same subject-matter and state of facts

...