Saunders v. Chi. & N. W. Ry. Co.

Citations

• 6 S.D. 40
• 60 N.W. 148
• 1894 S.D. LEXIS 117

Syllabus

<p>1. In an action against a railroad company for injury to a passenger, the gist of the action is negligence; and it must either be expressly proved, or such facts shown as will support an imputation of negligence.</p> <p>2. A presumption of negligence does not follow the simple and unexplained fact of an accident, but the cause or at least the nature of the accident resulting in the injury must be shown, for it is upon the character or nature of the accident that a presumption of negligence must rest.</p> <p>3. Where, in such an action, the plaintiff simply proves that, while standing at the open door of the coach in which he was riding, “there was a fearful shock,” resulting in his fall and injury, with nothing to show or even suggest the cause or nature of the shock, or whether it involved the train or the car in which he was, or was simply personal to himself, there is no evidence of defendants’s negligence, and the trial court rightly directed a verdict in its favor.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.</p>