St. Louis S.W. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Adams

163 S.W. 1029, 1914 Tex. App. LEXIS 554
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 14, 1914
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 163 S.W. 1029 (St. Louis S.W. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Adams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
St. Louis S.W. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Adams, 163 S.W. 1029, 1914 Tex. App. LEXIS 554 (Tex. Ct. App. 1914).

Opinion

TALBOT, J.

This suit was originally instituted by W. G. Adams, as the father and next friend of appellee, and on a former appeal a judgment rendered in favor of appellant upon an instructed verdict was affirmed. Afterwards, on a motion for a rehearing, the ease was reversed and remanded, because we were of opinion that the trial court erred in refusing to permit the plaintiff to take a nonsuit. Adams v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co., 137 S. W. 437. Appellee having arrived at the age of majority before the second trial, the petition was amended, and the suit prosecuted in her own name. In this amended petition, the material allegations are as follows: “Plaintiff shows that she boarded the train at Birmingham, Ala., and became a passenger en route to Cleburne, Tex.; that while en route to Texas, and before reaching Tex-arkana, plaintiff became somewhat sick, and when she arrived at Texarkana was feeling bad and strange, and had a high fever, and barely remembered leaving Texarkana en route to Dallas and Cleburne; that after she left Texarkana she got in a condition that she did not know anything, became delirious, and thought that there were robbers on the train, and was incapable of taking care of herself, and was incapable of knowing the danger of getting on and off the train; that she was incapable of exercising any reason, but was delirious and crazy from sickness, and was liable at any time to fall, jump, or escape out of or from the train, all of which was well known to the defendant, its servants and agents in charge of and operating said passenger train. Plaintiff shows that she remained in that condition until she reached a point west of Greenville, before daylight on the morning of June 11, 1908, when and where she unconsciously, and without knowledge or knowing what she did, jumped out of the window of the ear, or otherwise escaped from the car at the door, vestibule, or other opening, while it was running at a high rate of speed, and received and sustained serious and permanent injuries. Plaintiff shows that when she left Greenville she was delirious, and attempted to and did leave the train, and was put back on the train by force, under the direction of the conductor in charge of the train, and was permitted to sit down by an open window, or one that could be readily opened, and that the agents and servants in charge of the train failed and neglected to take any precaution to prevent her from jumping out of said window, or to prevent her from escaping from the train through some other way or opening; that said agents and servants knew that she was in said condition of mind; that she would likely open a- window, or likely fall or jump out of the window, or otherwise escape from the train, and failed and neglected to take any precaution to restrain her or to guard her, or have her guarded, and prevent her from thus being injured, all of which was great negligence and carelessness on the part of the officers of said train, and that by reason of their negligence to restrain and to guard her, and by reason of having her placed by an open window, or left alone by a window she could and would likely open, was a direct cause of plaintiff’s injuries. Plaintiff shows that when the train reached a point somewhere between Clinton, a station on the defendant’s line, and the county line in Hunt county, she unconsciously jumped, fell, or escaped from said train as aforesaid, and was injured; that when she struck the ground she had no knowledge of what had happened, and she never knew that she had jumped from the train until she came to herself while in the St. Paul’s Sanitarium in Dallas.” The defendant pleaded a general demurrer and various special exceptions to plaintiff’s petition, a general denial, and specially that plaintiff’s cause of action was barred by the statute of limitation of two *1030 years. The second trial resulted in a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $4,500, and the defendant perfected an appeal to this court.

The'first assignment of error is, in effect, that the court erred in refusing to give to the jury a peremptory instruction to return a verdict for the defendant, as requested in defendant’s special charge No. 1, because the evidence was not sufficient to sustain a verdict for the plaintiff, in that the evidence fails to show any act or omission of negligence on the part of defendant or its em-ployés which would entitle the plaintiff to recover. In other words, the contention, in substance, is that there is no evidence in the record showing any negligence on the part of the defendant proximately resulting in the injuries suffered by plaintiff, the evidence being insufficient to show that defendant’s employes in charge of the train, from which plaintiff fell or jumped, had such knowledge of any demented, delirious, or unconscious state of mind on the part of plaintiff, from which they might have had any reason to foresee or anticipate that plaintiff would be injured as alleged, by jumping from a window of the train. The following is the material testimony upon which a determination of the question presented depends:

Appellee testified: “In the month of June, 1908, I left Birmingham coming to Tex., with my destination as Cleburne, Tex. * * * when I left Birmingham my health was good, and my health was good before I left home for that trip. My health continued good, only I was a little tired with my trip, until I reached Memphis. I got to Memphis the next morning, and went from there to Texarkana, where I first commenced feeling bad. When the conductor came around to take up the tickets after we left Tex-arkana, I was sitting like I was asleep, I did not know anything at all. During the day, from the time I left Memphis until I arrived at Texarkana, I was all right, and ■only that I was worried, I don’t know whether I had any fever that day or not. Up to the time the conductor came through the train to take up the tickets after we left Texarkana, I don’t reckon that I had had any fever. When the conductor came around there to take up the tickets, I was just sitting there out of my head, I suppose; I did not know a thing. I don’t know how I came to be out of my head. The conductor stood there and asked me for my ticket and I told him I did not know where it was, I thought I had lost it. Then the conductor walked to some of the other people on the train and asked them if they knew where I got on, and whether I had a ticket, and they told him that I had. I found my ticket pinned on the inside of my waist, and I took it out and took it to the conductor. When the conductor was talking to me I felt like I was in a dream. I had no idea what was the cause of it. I remember telling the conductor that night after we came out of Texarkana that there were robbers on the train, I thought that they were on the train, and I told the conductor so. I got up from the place where I was sitting, and moved to a different part of the car and I told the conductor that there were robbers on the train, and he told the other people on the train that they need not pay any attention to what I said, that they had been having trouble with me all along, and he said some other slang words, cussing words, I don’t remember the words he said. I told him that I was going to get off the train. That was somewnere between here and Texarkana. I don’t know hardly how I did feel at that time, I felt like somebody crazy, I reckon, foolish, like I was asleep. I know now that I was not in my right mind; it seems to me like a dream when I think about it. I have thought about it often since then. The next thing I was conscious of was when I got off the train at Greenville, I remember getting off the train here.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Stewart v. Houston & T. C. Ry. Co.
229 S.W. 577 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1921)
Chicago, R. I. & G. Ry. Co. v. Sears
210 S.W. 684 (Texas Commission of Appeals, 1919)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
163 S.W. 1029, 1914 Tex. App. LEXIS 554, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-louis-sw-ry-co-of-texas-v-adams-texapp-1914.