Godfrey v. Meridian Light & Railway Co.

Citations

• 101 Miss. 565
• 58 So. 534

Syllabus

<p>1. Instructions. Damages. Carriers. Duty to receive passengers action for failure. Grounds of liability. Instructions cured by others.</p> <p>An instruction which assumes as true a controverted fact is erroneous.</p> <p>2. Damages. Punitive. Grounds for imposing.</p> <p>Punitive damages áre recoverable, not only for willful and intentional wrong, but for such gross and reckless negligence as is the equivalent of willful wrong in the eye of the law.</p> <p>3. Carriers. Duty to receive passengers. Action for failure-. Instructions.</p> <p>In an action against a street car company for damages for failing to stop its car and admit plaintiff as a passenger, an instruction that “if plaintiff did not sustain any actual damages, and that the conductor of defendant’s servants was not insulting ‘and’ intentionally willful, even though negligent, then the jury should only award plaintiff nominal damages,” is erroneous for two reasons. First, because it required the jury to believe that defendant’s conduct was insulting, capricious and intentionally willful, the three adverbs should have been used in the alternative and not conjunctively, and second, the phrase “even though negligent” would have warranted the jury in believing that any degree of negligence, even gross negligence was intended.</p> <p>4. Carriers. Duty to receive passengeres. Actions for' failure. Instructions.</p> <p>If an intending passenger is at a proper place and in time to catch an approaching street car and could have been seen by the servants of the company in charge of such car by the exercise of due care, then a failure to see such passenger and to stop and take her up is negligence and renders the company liable for damages.</p> <p>5. Same.</p> <p>In such case if the conduct of defendant servants was characterized by willful, intentional or reckless disregard of plaintiff’s right, exemplary damages may be imposed.</p> <p>6. Instructions Cured bx Others.</p> <p>Where an abstract proposition of law is