The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-05-24
SET ASIDE MRS. MARIN'S SUIT.
JUDGE DECIDES SHE HAD No CLAIM
AGAINST CAR LINES.

Nicolas Marin Got 0R "A Habershnm
street Car i'm Front of an APP
preaching Car on a Parallel Track
and WAS kiIIed-His widow Sued
for $4,000 Damages on Account of
the Car COmpany's NeEIiGence-The
Court Held That Marin's Death
Was His own FauIt-The Second
Set Aside.
A non-suit was granted by Judge Nor
wood in the City Court yesterday in the
case OF Mrs. Emile Marin against the sa-
vannah, Thunderboit and Isle of Hope
Railway Company Mrs. Marin sued for
$4,000 damages for the death of her hus-
band. Nicolas Marin, who was run. over
and fatally injured by a Habersham street
car July II last.
The deceased who was a well known
mechanic. had boarded the car on Brough-
ton street. for the purpose of going 10
Castor and Habersham streets. Arriving
there he got off the car hurriedly, before
II had come to a full stop, and was struck
by car coming in the opposite direction
on the parallel track, and badly mangled.
His injuries resulted fatally. The Plain
tiff, Mrs. Marin, claimed that the death
of her husband was due to the negligence
of the railway company in falling to pro-
vided any rope. gates, or other contrivance
or adjustment or to give warning in any
way to passengers of the danger of .alight-
ing from the car on the side next the adj
joining tracks.
Mr. Gordon Saussy represented Mrs.
Marin, while Messrs. Barrow & Osborne
appeared for the railway company. After
the plaintiffs witnesses had given their
evidence the attorneys for the railway
company moved for a nonsuit on the
ground that no case had been made out.
The contention of the railway company
was that the accident was due to the
gross carelessness of the deceased, claim
ing that he had jumped from the platform
of the car while in motion without giving
notice to the conductor, and that he land
ed on the parallel track Immediately in
front Of an approaching car going in the
opposite direction and which was so near
to him at the time that it was impossible
to stop it. 1t further claimed that the
deceased knew that the car which he was
on was TO stop on the opposite side of the
street, but that he did not wait for it to
do so.
The witnesses who were heard for the
plaintiff made out the case substantially
as claimed but one of the witnesses who
was passenger at the time, stated that
he had warned Mr.. Marin not to jump off
on that side of the track because of the
danger of the approaching car, and the
warning was not needed. This statement
proved very material to the defense.
The attorneys for the railway company
moved for a non-suit on the ground THAI
it was evident that the death of Marin
was due entirely to his own carelessncss
and negligence, for which the railway
company was in no wise responsible, and
that the plaintiff had failed to make out
her case. The attorneys argued the mo-
ton for non-suit at some length, and at
the conclusion of the argument Judge
Norwood sustained the motion.
Mr.. Saussy, the attorney for Mrs Marin,
stated that he would move for a reinstate-
ment of the case. This is the second dam
age suit in which non-suit has been
granted recently by Judge Norwood, both
suits being against the street railway COM
pany. The other case was that of DR.
]. B. Read and his driver, Edward Lloyd,
against the street railway company for iu-
juries received in coming in contact with
a low-hanging trolley wire The decision
in this case has been Appealed to the Su-
preme Court.