Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1910-10-03

on the morning of Feb. rs, 1909 the
plaintiff was passenger on the de-
PENDANTS car from West Bath to the
city of Bath. When the car stopped in
the City square the plaintiff proceeded
to alight, and in doing so her feet
slipped from the lower step of the car
to the pavement below causing her the
injuries sued for. She claimed at the
trial that the cause of her fall was the
slippery condition of the step from
snow and ice which the defendant had
negligently allowed to accumulate and
remain there. The jury returned YER
diet for the plaintiff for $780, No ex-
ceptions were taken, and the case is
before this court upon motion alone.
!. That the step of the car was
slippery at the time of the accident as
the result of an accumulation of snow
and ice thereon, is so well established
from the evidence as to be practically
unquestiOned. Besides the plaintiffs
testimony on this point, Mrs. Williams,
who was on the same step. testified:
THE most OF the step was banked in
with frozen snow and the edge of 1t
was icy.' Charles H. Williams, the
conductor of The car at the time, tes
titled: The lower step at the time had
quite q lot of ice on it, hard ice that
had frozen in there. And Phillip
Saunders, a witness for the defendant
and its division superintendent, who
examined the step Immediately after
the accident, testified that there was
ice on the step and that he made
note of that fact at the time.
10 hp or
and it does not appear that the previ-
Gus day had been stormy. There was
no evidence that any sand or other
material had been used. or that any
effort had been made to prevent or
overcome the slippery condition of the
step. We think the Jury We're warrant
ed in finding from all the evidence and
circumstances in this case that the
step of the defendants car on which
the plaintiff slipped was at the time
of the accident in a slippery and dan
gerore condition on account of an ac-
cumula ton thereon of snow and ice,
and that the defendant company was
negligent in allowing it to become and
remain 50.
p The defendant contends that the
jury We're not warranted by the evil
dencc in finding that the plaintiff was
in the exercise of due care in getting
off the car We think otherwise. The
plaintiff testified that she looked at
the steps. saw that there was no snow
on the upper one. did not see any snow
or ice on the other, and in a careful
manner undertook to use them. Other
witnesses testify that she was pro-
ceeding slowly when she slipped, and
that she still held her grasp on the rail
after her feet struck the pavement.
She thus described what she did and
how tn" accident happened: Il came
right out of the car and graSped hold
with my right hand the rail as ! al
ways dol am always pretty particu-
lar-and l stepped on the first step all
right and stepped both feet on the
second step, and my feet went out from
under me, and after that l never took
another step. and I kept hold of the
car all the time and ! could not take
stem and they could not move the
Ger until they removed me into the
waiting room. and they brought out
chair and carried me in"
The testimony of the conductor of
the car tends to show that the
|
that the lower one was not readily
seen by A person standing on the plat
form of the car, or perhaps when step
ping onto the upper one. 1t appears
that the plaintiffs right knee was still
ard had been for years, and in going
down steps she. was accustomed to
stop down one foot at time. We think
that the Jury We're justified in finding
that the plaintiff exercised due care
under all the circumstances of the
case.
8. IT is urged that the damages
awarded by the jury are excessive. The
testimony in behalf of the plaintiff
tends t. show that as result of ller
fall she sustained severe injuries to
both knees aud to her back; that she
was confined to her bed for several
weeks, after which she was able to get
about her room only by the aid 'of
chairs and a cane and that it was
three months before she was able to
get ont of the house; that she has not
been able and is still unable to per
form her accustomed work: and that
at the time of the trial-more than IL
months after the accident-her legs
were still swollen, and she was still
suffering pain resulting from her in
jurics.
After careful examination of all the
evidence relating to the question OF
damages it is the opinion of the court
that the amount awarded by the jury
is not so manifestly excessive that the
court ought to disturb the verdict on
that account.
Motion OVerruled.