Yazoo & M.V.R. Co. v. Smith

• Decision Date: 02 November 1903
• Citation: 35 So. 168,82 Miss. 656
• Parties: YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY v. FRANK P. SMITH
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

35 So. 168

82 Miss. 656

YAZOO & MISSISSIPPI VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY v. FRANK P. SMITH

Supreme Court of Mississippi

November 2, 1903

FROM the circuit court of Yazoo county. HON. ROBERT POWELL, Judge.

Smith appellee and cross-appellant, was plaintiff in the court below; the railroad company, appellant and cross-appellee was defendant there. From a judgment for $ 250 in plaintiff's favor the defendant appealed to the supreme court, and the plaintiff prosecuted a cross-appeal. A statement of the facts is unnecessary to an understanding of the opinion.

Case affirmed, and appeal reversed and remanded.

Mayes &amp Longstreet and J. M. Dickinson, for appellant and cross-appellee.

There is an instruction given for the defendant informing the jury that they should not find exemplary damages, yet plaintiff's instruction does not tell the jury that they may consider any of the instructions of the defendant, but informs them that they may find such damages as "they shall see fit" to assess under the instructions given for the plaintiff.

This instruction restricted the jury to the instructions given for plaintiff in order to ascertain the rule and measure of damages, and it warranted them, erroneously, in disregarding all the instructions for the defendant.

The action of the lower court in holding that the case was not one which would warrant punitive damages, was manifestly correct. There was no insult, oppression, no wanton conduct of any sort on the part of the conductor toward the passenger.

Passengers are bound to take notice of reasonable rules and regulations of the railroad company, and employes of the company are constrained to operate their trains in accordance with these rules.

Henry &amp Barbour, for appellee and cross-appellant.

The law is well settled that where by negligence of the common carrier a passenger is carried past his station, and a walk is necessitated, that the act of the carrier is the proximate cause of the resulting damage, provided the passenger has acted prudently in undertaking such a walk, and it is, except in unusual cases, a question for the jury, with proper instructions, to decide. Mask v. Railroad Co., 64 Miss. 744; Higgins v. Railroad Co., 64 Miss. 80; Railroad Co. v. Aden, 77 Miss. 386.

The only ground upon which we urge a reversal on cross-appeal is the giving of the first instruction for the defendant, and the refusal of the seventh instruction asked by the plaintiff. By these instructions the question of punitive damages was not permitted to go to the jury. This was error we admit.

In this case there is not shown any momentary forgetfulness, or any mere carelessness or inattention caused by rush of passengers, or attention to other duties, as was shown in the Scurf Case, 59 Miss. Nor is there in this case,...