Miss. & Tenn. R. R. v. Gill

Citations

• 66 Miss. 39

Syllabus

<p>1. Railroads. Conduetw. Insult to passengers. Damages.</p> <p>Although there is a breach of duty by the conductor of a railroad train toward a passenger, yet, in the absence of willful wrong, oppression, or reckless disregard of his rights, mere brusqueness in the words or manner of the conductor toward the passenger is not an insult which justifies the infliction of punitive damages against the company.</p> <p>2. Same. Failure to stop train. Punitive damages. Case in judgment.</p> <p>Upon the arrival of the train at their station, plaintiff and wife were prevented from alighting before the train moved off, owing to the crowding into the car of a large number of excursionists. In his efforts to signal the engineer to stop the plaintiff broke the bell-cord. The train had moved two or three hundred feet, when plaintiff demanded that the conductor stop the train. This the conductor refused to do, because “the train carried the U. S. mail.” At the same time he chided plaintiff for having broken the bell-cord, but he offered to take plaintiff and wife to the next station, six miles, whence they could return on an excursion train in an hour. This was done, plaintiff paying return fare. Held, not a case for punitive damages.</p> <p>3. Practice. Evidence. Pee ailing witness.</p> <p>Where a witness has been examined and dismissed, and a subsequent witness upon the same side is questioned on cross-examination as to new matters, about which, however, he is not informed, but about which the first witness is conversant, it is right to allow the first witness to be recalled and examined in reference to such matters.</p>