Bugge v. Seattle Electric Co.

Citations

• 54 Wash. 483
• 103 P. 824
• 1909 Wash. LEXIS 1022

Syllabus

<p>Carriers — Negligence—Notification to Passengers Alighting— Evidence — Res Gestae. In an action against a carrier for negligently instructing a passenger to walk across a trestle to transfer over a washout to another car, evidence that such a notification was given to another passenger, and communicated to the plaintiff, is admissible as part of the res gestae, although not given in plaintiff’s presence, where the car stopped at the washout and many passengers got out and started to walk across the trestle, and there was conflict in the testimony as to the notification.</p> <p>Carriers — Injury to Passenger — Negligence—Invitation to go on Track. It is negligence, warranting a recovery by a passenger, run down on a long trestle, for the street car company to invite passengers to transfer over a washout by crossing the trestle in the dark, with the assurance that no cars would cross the trestle that night, and while passengers were walking on the trestle to run them down by a car going in the opposite direction.</p> <p>Same — Contributory Negligence — Question eor Jury. In such a case, the contributory negligence of the passenger was for the jury, where she had no notice of the height of the trestle some distance away, there was necessity of avoiding delay, and many other passengers were crossing.</p> <p>Same — Who Abe Passengers — Invitation to Go on Track — Trespassers. A passenger who took a street car to a certain destination, without being informed of a washout preventing the car from making the trip, is a passenger while walking across a trestle, on the invitation of the conductor, in order to transfer over the washout to a car at the other end of the trestle, regardless of what agency caused the washout, or of the fact that no written transfer was issued; and instructions that she was a trespasser are properly refused.</p> <p>Damages — Personal Injuries — Excessive Verdict. A verdict for $15,000 for personal injuries is not excessive, where the plaintiff, a