The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1885-06-04
An Interesting Case.

An interesting case was tried before
| Judge Mclaughlin during the present
term of the Circuit Court for Augusta
county, under the style Of R. S. Gibbons,
ir.. VS.. the Chesapeake and Ohio Railway
Co. In 1884 Mr.. Gibbons owned a mill
property in Madison county. He had cor
respondenee with gentleman living at
Abeline. Kan. in reference to its pur-
chase. To facilitate negotiations he de-
termined to visit Kansas. He pur-
chased round trip ticket, limited. from
Stanton to Abeline. He was delayed at
Louisville by want of connections. On
reaching Belleville, ILL.,, the car on which
he was a passenger, was backed off the
track and down an embankment, by which
several passengers were seriously injured,
among them Mr.. Gibbons. He was I'M
conscious for awhile from the effect of the
injury, and after recovering from the
shock, he experienced severe pain i'll
the head. He proceeded on his journey,
but his suffering was so severe that he
had to stop with relative in Missouri
As soon as it was advisable he continued
on his trip to Abeline, without sue
ceeding in his business arrangement. On
his way home he was compelled again to
lay over and experienced some difficulty in
getting al extension OF his ticket. From
the time of the accident to the present,
he has suffered more or less from the con-
fusion and the jar to his system, occa-
stoned by the accident at Belleville, so
much so that his sight has been affected
ard his ability to read any length of time
impaired. Expert testimony, in the per-
son Of DIR. White. an occulist of Rich
mond, who had treated Mr. Gibbons, was
introduced to show that the plaintiff was
suffering from long sightedness, that
it!was congenital, and that the pain in his
head was caused by this affection. The
testimony was to the effect that the in
jury received might have precipitated the
development Of the disease, but that it
would have manifested itself in the course
of time, anyhow. Other expert witnesses
were introduced, among them DR.. FL. I'll.
Henkle, Of this place, to explain the eff
feet OF an injury such as Mr.. Gibbons re-
ceived, on the general system, and its
probable relation to the condition of the
plaintiff. The testimony Of both of these
witnesses was very interesting, we under
stand, and instructive-the one testifying
from the standpoint of specialist in the
treatment of the eye, and the other as a
general practitioner of medicine.
The case was ably argued by r. L. Parish
and H. T. Wickham for the Railroad CO.,
and II. ST. Geo. Tucker, of the place, and
W. j, Yancey, Of Rockingham, for the
plaintiff. At the conclusion of the argu-
ment, and after a short retiracy, the jury
brought in Il verdict Of S $500 damages
the amount sued for being $15,0O0-and
Judgment was rendered.accordingly The
attorn eysforthecompany moved the court
to set aside the verdict as being contrary
to the law and evidence, but the motion
was oyerruled.
The effect of the verdict is directly to
hold the G.. & O. Railway for the damage
awarded, but they have recourse on the
company managing the road on which the
accident occurred.
Mr.. Gibbons is q son Of Mr.. Robt. S.
Gibbons of Rockingham. The case ex-
cited considerable interest because of its
novel features.