Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Wilson

• Decision Date: 26 June 1903
• Citation: 75 S.W. 482
• Parties: WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. v. WILSON.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

75 S.W. 482

WESTERN UNION TELEGRAPH CO. v. WILSON.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 26, 1903.

Certified Questions from Court of Civil Appeals of First Supreme Judicial District.

Action by L. W. Wilson against the Western Union Telegraph Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appealed to the Court of Civil Appeals, First District, which certifies questions to the Supreme Court. Questions answered.

Geo. H. Fearons, Young & Stinchcomb, and N. L. Lindsley, for appellant.

WILLIAMS, J.

Certified questions from the Court of Civil Appeals for the First District, as follows:

"On March 11, 1902, C. L. Wilson sent from Dallas, Texas, to L. W. Wilson at Troupe, Texas, a telegram reading as follows: `Baby will die. Ethel very dangerous. Come at once. [Signed] C. L. Wilson.' The defendant telegraph company was paid therefor the full rate, and undertook to make prompt delivery thereof. The Ethel mentioned in the telegram was a sister of L. W. Wilson, and the baby therein mentioned was her female infant, less than three days old, which he had never seen. Both were dangerously ill. The telegraph company had no notice of the relationship existing between the parties, or what consequences would probably result from a failure to promptly deliver it, except what it was chargeable with by the terms of the message. On the day the message was sent the baby died, and was buried in Dallas on the next day. The telegram, though sent from Dallas at 2:35 p. m., did not reach appellee until 9 o'clock on the morning of the next day, and, though he took the first train for Dallas, he did not arrive until after the burial of the baby. He could and would have gone in time had the message been delivered promptly. He brought this suit against the telegraph company to recover damages for mental anguish suffered by him as a result of his failure to be present at the burial of the child and by reason of his inability to be present and render consolation and aid to his sister at the burial and during her illness. The evidence shows that he suffered mental anguish both on account of his failure to attend the child's funeral and failure to be present and console his sister. Upon the trial he established the facts above set out. The evidence was conflicting on the issue of negligence of the company, but was sufficient to require the submission of the issue.

"Question 1. In the absence of all notice to the company, except such as was conveyed by the terms of the message, can the...