Chicago, St. Louis, & New Orleans Railroad v. Trotter

Citations

• 60 Miss. 442

Syllabus

<p>1. Railkoad. Injury to passenger. Action therefor. Proof.</p> <p>In an action against a railroad company by one claiming to have received injuries to his person as a passenger on the defendant’s train, it is not sufficient for the plaintiff to prove the injuries alone, but it devolves upon him to show negligence on the part of the defendant, unless the injury resulted from a cause which ordinarily exists only by reason of the negligence of the carries.</p> <p>2. Same. Fall of passenger. Negligence of whom. Case in judgment..</p> <p>T., a young lady, purchased a ticket with the intention of becoming a passenger on a railroad train, and in attempting, at night, to enter the train while it was standing at a station, walked off of the front platform of the ladies’ car and was physically injured by the fall. She sued the railroad company for damages, alleging that the accident was caused by the negligence of the defendant in not having sufficient lights about the train. Held, that accidents of this character are not such as are ordinarily caused only by the negligence of the carrier.</p> <p>3. Same. Sect. 1059, Code 1880, construed.</p> <p>Sect. 1059 of the Code of 1880 is in the following language: “In all actions against railroad companies for damage done to persons or property, proof of injury inflicted by the running of the locomotives or cars of such company shall be prima facie evidence of the want of reasonable skill and care on the part of the servants of such company, in reference to such injury.” This provision is not applicable to a suit against a railroad company, where the cause of action arises ex contractu, but is limited to suits by those who, being neither shippers nor passengers, have been injured in their persons or property.</p>