Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Crider
| Decision Date | 26 January 1900 |
| Citation | 107 Ky. 600 |
| Parties | Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Crider. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
APPEAL FROM HARDIN CIRCUIT COURT.
W. H. MARRIOTT FOR APPELLANT.
A. E. RICHARDS AND WM. LINDSAY ALSO FOR APPELLANT, ARGUED ORALLY.
R. L. STITH AND J. D. IRWIN FOR APPELLEE.
CHIEF JUSTICE HAZELRIGG DELIVERED THE OPINION OF THE COURT.
The appellee was an invalid, living at Elizabethtown, to whom her physician, living at Vine Grove, had sent by mail, on March 16, 1895, a prescription of quinine and morphine, to be taken in capsules every two hours on the following morning. At 11:25 o'clock on the night of the same day the physician sent to her the following telegram:
The message reached the terminal office at Elizabethtown in a few minutes after it was sent from Vine Grove, but was not delivered to Mrs. Crider until 6:40 o'clock on the next morning. In the meantime the patient had taken two of the capsules, beginning at 2 o'clock that morning. On receipt of the message, she was naturally alarmed. She became quite sick, although assured by a physician, for whom she had sent immediately, that there was nothing dangerous in the medicine. She was quite sick during the day, and claims that she then suffered greatly, and for days afterwards, from the effects of the medicine.
While the medicine is shown by all the physicians who testify to have been the proper medicine for her, and ought to have been beneficial, rather than hurtful, to her, it did make her sick, and apparently cause her considerable suffering. She brings this action because of this suffering, which, she claims, she would not have undergone had the message been delivered promptly.
The chief contention relied on by the company to defeat recovery is that, under its rules and regulations, which were reasonable, there was no night delivery at the Elizabethtown office. The proof on this behalf was introduced wholly by the company, and shows that the company only had a day operator, who sent and received messages from eight in the morning until seven in the evening; that the night operator worked exclusively for the railway company, but was to receive and send messages at night, turning over the collections therefor to the day operator in the morning, who was then to deliver them; that this night operator was not permitted to leave the office at night, and there was no one kept there to deliver messages, because the business was not sufficient to justify this expenditure.
The night operator explained the delivery of the message in question at 6:40 by saying that he obtained permission of the train dispatcher to take it to Mrs. Crider, because he noticed its contents, and supposed, if delivered at the early hour of 6:40, it would be early enough; that there was no one about the depot that night after he received the message by whom he could send it, and his presence that night was required at the office, taking orders for trains and giving signals...
To continue reading
Request your trial