Case ID: sc_129/html/0013-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Mr. Justice Watts.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

11529
    BENNETT v. A. C. L. RAILROAD ET AL.
    
    (123 S. E., 327)
    Carriers — Evidence of Injury to Passenger Leaving Train After it , Passed Destination Held Not to Show Negligence on Railroad’s Part. — Evidence that plaintiff, a passenger, voluntarily got off train after it had passed destination, and was injured by stepping . off a trestle while walking towards his destination, held not to show negligence on railroad’s part.
    Before Memminger, J., Barnwell, Spring Term, 1923.
    Affirmed.
    Acton by T. F. Bennett against Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Co. and another. From an order of nonsuit plaintiff appeals.
    The plaintiff was a passenger on defendant’s train, due to arrive at Orangeburg about 10:30 p. m., but did not alight at his destination, and later got off the train at the water tank west of Orangeburg, and attempted to walk back to the station at Orangeburg. On his way back he stepped off of the trestle over the Edisto River, and sustained the injuries involved in the present action.
    
      . Messrs. Brown & Bush, R. C. Holman and Thomas M. Boulware, for appellant,
    cite: Injuries sustained by passenger zualking home after leaving station at invitation of 
      
      trainmen held proximate result of negligence of trainmen: 105 S. C., 132; 146 S. W., 849; 157 S. W., 245; 141 S. W., 341. Passenger who passes his station is still a passenger until he refuses to pay additional fare: 79 S. E., 91; 113 N. W„ 447; 20 L. R. A. (N. S.), 1019; 145 Pac., 1023; 128 A. S. R., 234; 105 S. W., 26.
    
      Messrs. Harley & Blatt and Douglas McKay, for -respondent,
    cite: Liability of carrier where passenger is carried beyond destination: 10 C. J., 825; 2 Hutch. Car., 3rd Ed., Sec. 1126; 182 Pa., 457; 8 Sou., 330; 90 Mo. App., 489; 66 Tex., 603; 76 S. W., 697. Plaintiff voluntarily leaving train terminated relation of passenger: 15 L. R. A., 399; 69 S. C., 445; 71 S. C., 532; 117 S. W., 217. Proximate cause: 54 Mich., 555; 3 Hutch. Car., 3rd Ed., Sec. 1428, 1430 ; 72 S. C., 336.
    June 9, 1924.
   The opinion of the Court was delivered by

Mr. Justice Watts.

This is an appeal from an order of nonsuit granted by his Honor, Judge Memminger, at Barnwell, Spring term. 1923.

The exceptions, three in number, allege error. We see no error. According to his own testimony, the plaintiff was asleep when he reached his destination, Orangeburg. When he arrived at the coal chute, and was told where he was, he, of his own volition, disembarked from the train; he was not required to do so. He saw the trestle, for he says when he saw it he turned back and attempted to catch the train, but it pulled out before he got to it, and he then attempted to walk the trestle, and fell off. The whole evidence fails to show any actionable negligence against the railroad. Appellant’s negligence was the sole cause of his injury.

The exceptions are overruled, and judgment affirmed.

Messrs. Justices Eraser, Cothran and Marion concur.

Mr. Chiee Justice Gary did not participate.