Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Hogue

• Decision Date: 07 May 1906
• Citation: 94 S.W. 924
• Parties: WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. v. HOGUE et al.
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

94 S.W. 924

WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. v. HOGUE et al.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

May 7, 1906.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Chicot County; Z. T. Wood, Judge.

Action by A. E. Hogue and another against Western Union Telegraph Company. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Reversed and remanded.

Mr. A. E. Hogue, of Lake Village, Ark., and Miss Bama Glosup, were engaged to be married, and Sunday, August 7, 1904, was the day on which the marriage was to take place. A week or two previous to that date he was taken sick with fever. On the 6th of August he sent the following letter to her: "Lake Village, Ark. 8 — 6 — 04. Miss Bama Glosup, Wilmar, Ark. In answer to your letter last night will say that I will be there Sunday if I am able to come. I will wire you if I come, or if I don't. But you write the livery man and tell him to save me the best team he has, and you can call at the office or send for fear they won't deliver it. Look for me or a telegram. Yours as ever, A. E. Hogue." On the evening of the 7th at 9:20 o'clock Hogue delivered the following message to the operator of defendant at Lake Village: "Miss Bama Glosup, Wilmar, Ark. I will be there on the evening train. A. E. Hogue." Hogue paid the charges for its transmission, but the message was never delivered at Wilmar. Hogue arrived at Wilmar on the train at 5 o'clock p. m., and was met at the train by Miss Glosup. They were married the same evening. They afterwards brought this action to recover damages from the company for failure to deliver the telegram. They alleged that they suffered $1.25 pecuniary loss, by reason of the failure to deliver the telegram, and that plaintiff Mrs. Bama Hogue, on account of the failure to receive the telegram, suffered great mental anguish under the belief that some misfortune had overtaken said A. E. Hogue, and that she suffered humiliation in other ways. They therefore asked judgment for the sum of $1.25 pecuniary damages and $1,000 for mental anguish and suffering. The defendant answered and denied liability. On the trial the jury returned a verdict for $1.75 actual pecuniary loss and for $500 damages for pain and suffering. Defendant appealed.

Rose, Hemingway, Cantrell & Loughborough, for appellant. Harry E. Cook, for appellees.

RIDDICK, J. (after stating the facts).

This is an appeal by the defendant telegraph company from a judgment rendered against it for failure to deliver a telegram. In the complaint plaintiffs asked for $1.25 as pecuniary loss and $1,000 damages for pain and mental anguish. The proof tended to show that by reason of the failure to deliver the telegram plaintiffs were compelled to hire a man to get them a conveyance and that this expense with the price paid for the telegram amounted to $1.75. The jury found a verdict for this amount, and also for $500 for mental pain and suffering. The circuit court gave judgment for the amount of the verdict, but we are of the opinion that the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the judgment.

The excess of 50 cents in the verdict for pecuniary loss over the amount asked in the complaint was evidently a mere oversight, which would...