Western Union Tel. Co. v. Trice

Decision Date08 December 1898
Citation48 S.W. 770
PartiesWESTERN UNION TEL. CO. v. TRICE et al.
CourtTexas Court of Appeals

Appeal from district court, De Witt county; James C. Wilson, Judge.

Action by Sallie Trice and another against the Western Union Telegraph Company. There was a judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Norman G. Kittrell, for appellant. Grimes & Baker, for appellees.

WILLIAMS, J.

Action by appellees, husband and wife, to recover damages for negligent failure of appellant to deliver telegrams. A statement of the pleadings is unnecessary. Trial by the judge without jury, and judgment for plaintiffs for $1,000.

David Natt was dangerously ill at his home at Huntsville, Tex., on the 3d day of February, 1897, and his wife, desiring the presence at his bedside of his sister, Mrs. Sallie Trice, caused her father, H. Mallett, to deliver to appellant's agent at Huntsville, for transmission and delivery to Mrs. Trice at Cuero, where she and her husband resided, the following telegram: "Dated Huntsville, Texas, February 3rd, 1897. To Mrs. Sallie Trice, Cuero, Texas: Dave is very low. Come on first train if can. H. Mallett." In setting out this telegram in haec verba, the petition omitted the last two words, "if can." This was promptly and diligently sent from Huntsville to appellant's manager at Cuero, and was received by him at 10:40 o'clock a. m. of February 3d. It was never delivered to Mrs. Trice or her husband. At 7 o'clock p. m., same day, the Cuero agent sent to the Huntsville agent a service message informing him that the first message had not been delivered, and that the party was unknown. The office at Huntsville was closed for the night before this message could be received, but it was delivered to the agent there in due time next morning. He at once notified Mallett, and also a brother of Mrs. Trice, and they went to his office, and informed him that Mr. Trice was in market business in Cuero, and directed that, if he could not be found, the message should be put in the post office at Cuero, and these instructions were wired to the agent at that place. James Natt, the brother, also sent to a friend at Beeville, who he thought could give the Trices' address, a telegram requesting him to wire them the information, and, between 4 and 6 o'clock p. m. of the 4th, Mr. Trice received from that party the following telegram: "Dave is very low. Jim Natt says come." Mrs. Trice thereupon made preparations to go to Huntsville by the next train, which was to leave Cuero at 10:30 a. m. next day, February 5th, but, on a suggestion from a friend that there was no knowing how long the information had been at Beeville, that her brother might be dead and buried, and that it was best to send a telegram for further information, Mrs. Trice sent to Huntsville the following message "Cuero, February 5th, 1897. Mrs. Dave Natt, Huntsville: Let me hear from Dave at once. All sick here. Sallie Trice." To...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Western Union Telegraph Company v. Weniski
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • November 25, 1907
    ...excessive. 102 S.W. 366; 73 S.W. 79; 25 S.W. 722; 23 S.W. 998; 81 S.W. 1052; 10 S.W. 734; 33 S.W. 708; 60 S.W. 982; 58 S.W. 118; Id. 428; 48 S.W. 770; 26 S.W. 866; 16 25. Rose, Hemingway, Cantrell & Loughborough, for appellant in reply. It would carry the doctrine of imputed notice to the v......
  • Western Union Telegraph Company v. Blackmer
    • United States
    • Arkansas Supreme Court
    • May 6, 1907
    ...Tenn. 167; Same v. Porter (Texas), 26 S.W. 866; Same v. O'Keefe (Texas), 29 S.W. 1137; Same v. Russell (Texas), 33 S.W. 708; Same v. Trice (Texas), 48 S.W. 770; Same v. Patton (Texas), 55 S.W. Same v. Norris (Texas), 60 S.W. 982; Same v. James (Texas), 73 S.W. 79. In this case the mother at......
  • Vanderberg v. Kansas City, Mo., Gas Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 21, 1906
  • Ely v. Lasch
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • November 14, 1928
    ...because not proved by three bystanders. Article 2237, R. S. 1925; Peugh v. Moody (Tex. Civ. App.) 145 S. W. 296; W. U. Tel. Co. v. Trice (Tex. Civ. App.) 48 S. W. 770; Austin State R. Co. v. Calhoun (Tex. Civ. App.) 240 S. W. 327; Crane v. State, 91 Tex. Cr. R. 304, 240 S. W. 920; Holloman ......
  • 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