Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Taylor

100 So. 163, 87 Fla. 398
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided April 14, 1924·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

West, J.

-This action is to recover for mental anguish and. physical pain and sickness alleged to have been suffered by plaintiff Myrtle II. Taylor, because of the alleged negligent failure of defendant to promptly transmit and deliver to her a telegram received by it for transmission and delivery. There was a verdict of $650 for plaintiffs, addressee and sender of the telegram. Motion for new trial was made and granted unless a remittutur of $250 was made. Remittitur was entered and judgment for plaintiff for $400 was awarded. Defendant took writ of error.

The telegram is as follows: “Perry, Fla., 7/27, 1921. To: Mrs. C. F. Taylor, care of Spring Cottage Hotel, Fort Pierce, Fla. Will be in Jacksonville and meet you all Saturday. You leave there Friday night. Have Fred secure sleeper for you all. Get ten dollars from your mother for sleeper. I.will mail it back to her. Fred.”

It-is alleged that the defendant, Western Union Telegraph Company, “carelessly and negligently failed, refused and neglected to transmit and deliver said message and telegram to the said” plaintiff and that said message wa never delivered; that prior to the time of the delivery of the message to be transmitted by the defendant, the sender had written the addressee “advising her that.he -would wire her as to the time and manner of coming from Fort Pierce to Jacksonville, Florida, and on to Perry, Florida,” and that “because of the failure to deliver the said message the said Myrtle H. Taylor suffered mental pain and anguish *' * * and not having gotten the said message the said Myrtle H. Taylor did not know what to do about the trip home to Perry, Florida”; that she left Fort Pierce for Perry, Florida, on Friday, the 29th day of July, 1921, but that “because of not having gotten the message the said Myrtle H. Taylor did not take a sleeper .and did not ride on a sleeper from Fort Pierce to Ja’ck[401] sonville, but rode on a day coach in the night time a part of the way with these children”; “that the said Myrtle H. Taylor would have gotten the said ten dollars from her mother * * * if she had known it would be all right with her husband, but as she had not received any message or any telegram the said Myrtle H. Taylor did not know what to do or what course to pursue with reference to the trip”; “that this mental suffering and pain and agony of mind suffered by the said Myrtle H. Taylor, because of failing to get' this telegram” caused her to become sick and enfeebled and to suffer mental and physical pain, anguish and worry, and to remain sick and enfeebled for a long period of time.

There was a plea of not guilty and a special plea, the averments of which it is not necessary to set forth.

The statute upon which the action is predicated is Section 4388, Revised General Statutes, which for convenience we insert:

“4388. Recovery for mental anguish and physical suffering; burden of proof. — That persons; firms and corporations engaged in the business of transmitting telegrams into or' out of this State, or from one point to another, point in this State, shall be liable in damages to the sender and addressee, jointly or severally, of any telegram received for transmission and delivery, whether such telegram is received for transmission into or out of this State, or from one point to another point within this State, for mental anguish, distress or feeling, physical and mental pains and suffering resulting from the negligent failure to promptly transmit or promptly deliver such telegram, or because of the negligent failure to correctly transmit and deliver such telegram. And in all cases brought under this Act the burden of proof shall be upon the defendant to show to the satisfaction of the jury, or if there be no [402] jury, to the satisfaction of the judge trying the case,- by a preponderance of the evidence, that such defendant was free from fault in and about the transmission and delivery of any telegram received for transmission and delivery.”

It is contended by plaintiff in error, and this contention is admitted to be in the main correct, that there are three distinct elements comprising the damages alleged, namely: first, that the plaintiff had received a letter from the sender, her husband, advising that he would telegraph her as to the time and manner of coming from Fort Pierce to Jacksonville, and that the telegram, though received for transmission by defendant, was never delivered, and the failure to receive it by plaintiff caused her to suffer mental pain and anguish; second, that she undertook the trip from Fort Pierce to Jacksonville, and because she was not authorized to borrow $10 from her mother with which to pay pullman fare, traveled in a day coach instead of a pullman car, causing her mental suffering and pain and agony of mind; and third,, that such mental suffering and pain ocassioned by the failure to receive the telegram, and traveling in a day coach at night, caused her to become sick and to suffer mental anguish and physical pain.

Generally telegraph companies are liable for such damages as naturally and proximately flow or result from their negligent failure to promptly transmit and deliver messages received by them for transmission and delivery. Western Union Tel. Co. v. Hyer Bros. 22 Fla. 637, 1 South. Rep. 129; Western Union Tel. Co. v. Milton, 53 Fla. 484, 43 South. Rep. 495.

In this jurisdiction, prior to the enactment of the statute quoted, mental anguish resulting from the negligent failure to promptly deliver a telegraph message’ received for transmission and delivery was not an element of damage for which recovery could be had. International Ocean [403] Tel. Co. v. Saunders, 32 Fla. 434, 14 South. Rep. 148; Hildreth v. Western Union Tel. Co., 56 Fla. 387, 47 South. Rep. 820. But in Western Union Tel. Co. v. Wells, 50 Fla. 474, 39 South. Rep. 838, 111 Am. St. Rep. 129, 2 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1072, it was held that the wilful refusal of a telegraph'company to pay money in its hands for one entitled thereto on telegraphic order, with knowledge that such person would have to travel a long distance without food, rendered the company liable in damage for mental pain and anguish.

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

Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Taylor, 100 So. 163, 87 Fla. 398 (Fla. 1924).

100 So. 163 (Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Taylor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Western Union Telegraph Company v. Suit
15 So. 2d 33 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Taylor
114 So. 529 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Hunter v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
2 F.2d 266 (S.D. Florida, 1924)