half a mile long, and in consequence became sick and lost two
weeks' work. International, etc., R. Co. v. Wilkes (Tex.). 331.
Exemplary damages. In action for injury received through negligence
of servants, exemplary damages may be recovered where injuries are
wanton, although act may not have been previously authorized or
subsequently ratified. Philadelphia Traction Co. v. Orbann (Pa.).
432.
Exemplary damages. Instruction in action for personal injuries that
facts in evidence to authorize punitive damages must be such as
would subject defendant's servant to liability to conviction for
criminal negligence is properly refused. Augusta & S. R. Co. v.
Randall (Ga.). 439.
Exemplary damages. Newsboy pushed from step of street car by con-
ductor and run over, held, not entitled to recover exemplary dam-
ages, there being no evidence that the act was wilful or wanton.
Philadelphia Traction Co. v. Orbann (Pa.). 432.
Exemplary damages: recovery of, for torts of servants. 439 n.
Exemplary damages. See PASSENGER.
Infant. Instruction that plaintiff, who was a minor and living with his
mother, would be entitled to recover for diminished capacity to
labor, held, not a ground for reversal where there is no complaint
that the verdict was not excessive. Houston, etc., R. Co. v. Boozer
(Tex.). 63.
Injuries to crops. See SURFACE WATER.
Injuries to crops. In an action for the destruction of crops where
plaintiff alleges that crops were owned by himself and his tenant,
and that he had obtained his tenant's claim for damages, plaintiff's
recovery is limited to such crops as the tenant at the time of the
destruction had an interest in, and the evidence of injury must be
confined to such crops. Gulf, etc., R. Co. v. McGowan (Tex.). 210.
Knowledge of jury. In assessing damages for wrongful death the jury
may use their common knowledge and experience in relation to
matters of common observation without direct evidence of the
specific pecuniary loss. Union Pac. R. Co. v. Dunden (Kan.). 88.
Occupation of plaintiff. Jury may, in estimating damages, consider
occupation of plaintiff. Óhio & M. R. Co. v. Hecht (Ind.). 447.
Opinion of witness, not expert, as to damages not admissible. 428 n.
Remote damages. In action for injuries in which only evidence intro-
duced referred to injuries sustained and pain suffered, instruction
that "if damages are only imaginary result of tortious act, or other
circumstances preponderated largely in causing injury, such dam-
ages are too remote to be basis of recovery, and damages traceable
to act, but not its legal consequences, are too remote is properly
refused. Augusta & S. R. Co. v. Randall (Ga.). 439.
DEAF MUTE. See TRESPASSER.
DEATH. See PARENT AND CHILD.
Aggravation of disease. Although person had pneumonia at time of
injury and died of it, the injury was the cause of the death if it im-
paired his strength so as to render disease incurable. Louisville
& N. R. Co. v. Jones (Ala.). 417.
Assessment of damages. In assessing damages for wrongful death the
jury may use their common knowledge in relation to matters of
common observation without direct evidence of the specific pecuni-
ary loss. Union Pac. R. Co. v. Dunden (Kan.). 88.
Evidence. Sufficiency. To authorize recovery for negligent killing it is
sufficient if there is such preponderance of testimony as produces
conviction that death resulted from defendant's negligence. Louis-
ville & N. R. Co. v. Jones (Ala.). 417.
Excessive damages for causing death of minor.
Excessive damages. $5000 held not excessive for the death of a brick-
mason who left widow and a number of children. Virginia Mid-
land R. Co. v. White (Va.).
Excessive damages. $3000 for causing the death of minor eleven years
old, and who left a poor father having a wife and three children, is
not so excessive as to require a reversal. Union Pac. R. Co. v.
Dunden (Kan.). 88.
Minors. Assessment of damages in action for death of minor children.
93 n.
Minor. Value of services. Court commits no material error in refusing
to require the jury to itemize the value of the probable future
services of the intestate minor. Union Pac. R. Co. v, Dunden
(Kan.). 88.
Previous bad health. Fact that person injured would have recovered if
he had not been in bad health at the time the accident occurred will
not preclude recovery, if death was not sole result of bad health.
Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Jones (Ala.). 417.
Proximate cause. If death of person from pneumonia is contributed
to or hastened through negligence of company, it is liable,
although death would in any event have supervened. Louisville
&. N. R. Co. v. Jones (Ala.). 417.
Survival of action. No cause of action survives to administrator for
assault by driver of street car upon passenger causing injury result-
ing in death, but administrator may sue for violation of contract
obligation. Winnegar v. Central Pass. R. Co. (Ky.). 462.
Venue. Action may be brought against a railway company to recover
damages for wrongful killing in the parish where the damage was
done. Houston v. Vicksburg, etc., R. Co. (La.). 76.
DISCRIMINATION. See INTERSTATE COMMERCE.
Passengers. Ticket. Railroad may charge more as fare to those pay-
ing on train than it charges for tickets. Reasonable opportunity
to procure tickets: what is. State v. Hungerford (Minn.). 265.
DRAINS. See SURFACE WATER.
DRAWING-ROOM CAR. See TICKET.
Consequential damages. By the insertion of the words "or damaged "
in the Nebraska constitution, a right to recover for injuries to prop-
erty was conferred, although no property has been taken.
EVIDENCE. See MASTER And Servant; Street Railways.
Baggage. Value. Custom house inspector cannot testify as to value
of personal baggage usually carried by emigrants Carlson v.
Oceanic Steam Nav. Co. (N. Y.). 215.
Burden of proof. See PASSENGER.
Competency of the party. In an action to recover damages for the
death of a child in which husband and wife are joined as co-plaint-
iffs, wife is a competent witness. Reilly v. Hannibal & St. Jo. R.
Co. (Mo.). 81.
Condition of track: evidence admissible as to, in case of accident.
404 n.
Declarations of agent. Where a person acts as a company's agent
under such circumstances as to imply knowledge on the company's
part, his authority to act is established prima facie and his declara-
tions are admissible in evidence. Indiana, etc., R. Co. v. Adamson
(Ind.). 127.
Declarations of servant. Declarations made by section-master concern-
ing sufficiency of culvert not falling within the scope of his duties
are inadmissible in action for overflow of land. Waldrop v. Green-
ville, etc., R. Co. (S. Car.). 204.
Declarations. Pain and suffering. Declarations of party injured with
regard to existing pain and suffering or to present condition of body
or mind may be shown by any person who heard the same. Atch-
ison, etc., R. Co. v. Johns (Kan.). 480.
Defective appliances. In action for injuries to passenger engineer, in
relating how the accident happened, may state that the engine boiler
leaked steam. Lakin v. Oregon Pac. R. Co. (Ore.). 500.
Defective track. Where train was derailed owing to a broken rail, evi-
dence that track, not only at the spot where the accident occurred,
but at other places, was defective, is inadmissible. Pattee v. Chi-
cago, etc., R. Co. (Dak.). 399.
Derailment. In action for personal injury caused by derailment of
train, instruction that derailment proves negligence held erroneous.
Pattee v. Chicago, etc., R. Co. (Dak.). 399.
Experts. Disease induced by injury. When verdict for plaintiff will
not be reversed as contrary to an instruction that the expert's opin-
ion that a result may possibly follow from a certain cause, does not.
in the absence of proved facts or circumstances tending to that end,
contribute sufficient evidence that such exceptional result did in
fact follow. Quackenbush v. Chicago & N. W. R. Co. (Iowa). 545.
Expert. In an action upon a construction contract where the question
of time required to complete the work is material, the testimony of
railway builders is competent. Louisville, etc., R. Co. v. Donnegan
(Ind.). 116.
Injuries to passenger. Construction of car. For purpose of showing
how injury was received, passenger may testify as to construction
of car and position in which she was at time of accident. Lakin v.
Oregon Pac. R. Co. (Ore.). 500.
Intoxication. In an action by a widow to recover for the death of her
husband, held, that the admission in evidence of plaintiff's remark
"that he always went on the track when drunk" was a harmless er-
ror. Hughes v. Galveston, etc., R. Co. (Tex.). 66.
Medical book. If an extract from a medical book has some bearing
upon the extent of injuries and their cause, it ought not to be ex-
cluded on the ground that it was too indefinite. Quackenbush v.
Chicago & N. W. R. Co. (Iowa). 545.
Opinion. Death of stock. In an action for the death of stock caused
by a flood, a witness who has stated his means of information as to
the loss may give his opinion as to the number of dead animals.
Sabine & E. T. R. Co. v. Broussard (Tex.). 199.
Opinion of witness, not expert, as to damages not admissible. 428 n.
Opinion. Tariff. Classification. Testimony of persons connected with
transportation is not admissible for purpose of explaining terms
used in tariff sheet, when goods are inserted by name presumed
to be known by the trade. Hurlburt v. Lake Shore, etc., R. Co.
(I. S. C. C.). 596.
Other accidents. Where passenger on leaving train fell over precipice,
evidence that another person had fallen over the same place, al-
though improperly admitted, held not to justify a reversal. Smith
v. Central R. & B. Co. (Ga.). 456.
Parol evidence to explain judgment. In an action for the overflow of
land, caused by the defective construction of a bridge, where the
judgment in a former suit offered in evidence as a bar does not
show the true state of matters, parol evidence may be given in ex-
planation. Chicago, etc., R. Co. v. Schaffer (Ill.). 174.
Personal injuries. Collision between wagon and horse-cars; conflict-
ing evidence as to negligence should be left to the jury. North Hud-
son St. R. Co. v. Isley (N. Y.). 94.
Personal injuries. Evidence that passenger alleged to have been in-
jured had made appointment for next day after he was injured, and
that he walked four or five miles to keep it, is admissible. Stevens
v. Central R. & B. Co. (Ga.). 413.
Profane language. Passenger ejected from train and evidence offered
tending to show that he used vile and profane language; evidence
in rebuttal held incompetent. Atchison, etc., R. Co. v. Gants
(Kan.). 290.
Res gesta: admissibility of declarations made by party injured as part
of. 446 n.
Res gesta. Statement made by passenger after she had fallen in alight-
ing from street car, obtained driver's name, gone home, and then
gone to her sister's house, cannot be received as part of res gesta,
even under Georgia statute. Augusta & S. R. Co. v. Randall (Ga.).
439.
Messenger injury to. Defective machinery and negligence in employ-
ing servants. 359 n.
Messenger. Public policy. Railroad company not being compelled to
carry express messenger in baggage car may stipulate for condition
to relieve it from liability for accidents and personal injuries.
Bates v. Old Colony R. Co. (Mass.). 355.
Messenger: stipulation in contract of, that in return for permission to ride
in baggage car he should assume all risks, is supported by sufficient
consideration. Bates v. Old Colony R. Co. (Mass.). 355.
Statutory provision. Construction. Under statute which requires rail-
roads to give reasonable and equal terms and facilities, railroads are
not required to carry merchandise and messengers of express com-
panies in baggage cars on reasonable terms equally favorable. Bates
v. Old Colony R. Co. (Mass.). 355.
FLOODS. See BRIDGE; SURFACE WATERS; WATERS.
Service of process in action against foreign corporation cannot be
made on agent whose authority is limited to soliciting business,
although he has been employed to compromise the suit. Maxwell
v. Atchison, etc., R. Co. (C. C.). 574.
Service of process on agents of foreign corporation. 580 n.
Bridge company incorporated for purpose of constructing bridge across
river which forms boundary line between two States, held, a com-
mon carrier within meaning of act, and as such is entitled to
facilities from other roads for exchange of traffic. Kentucky & I.
Bridge Co. v. Louisville & N. R. Co. (Ï. S. C. C.). 630.
Car-load lots. Discrimination. Rate charged for transportation of oil
in less than car-load lots, held, not unreasonable when compared
with the rate for car-load lots. Scofield v. Lake Shore, etc., R. Co.
(I. S. C. C.). 685.
Car rental. Reasonableness.
A rate of three fourths of one per cent
per mile for rental of cars supplied by another than the carrier is a
reasonable rate, having been in use many years and being generally
charged by car-furnishing companies. Scofield v. Lake Shore, etc.,
R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 685.
Carriage of oil. Danger. Commission will not consider danger from
transportation of oil through city in deciding upon reasonableness
of rate charged for carriage of oil. Brady v. Pennsylvania R. Co.
(I. S. C. C.). 603.
Classification. Agreement with carrier. An assurance made to manu-
facturer upon his locating at a certain point that the company
would carry his goods as belonging to a certain class, has no force
in determining to which class the goods belonged. Hurlburt v. Lake
Shore, etc., R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 596.
Classification. Discrimination. Use of different classifications is a
violation of fourth section of the act when the effect is to increase
revenue from local traffic as compared with through traffic. Martin
v. Southern Pac. R. Co. (I. S. C. ̊C.). 612.
Classification. Evidence. Member of railroad committee which pre-
pared official classification cannot testify as to understanding of
committee when they prepared it. Hurlburt v. Lake Shore, etc., R.
Co. (I. S. C. C.). 596.
Classification. Hub-blocks should be
classed as "lumber," and not as
Hurlburt v. Lake Shore, etc., R.
"wagon material unfinished."
Co. (I. S. C. C.). 596.
Classification. Opinion evidence. Expert. Testimony of persons
connected with transportation is not admissible for purpose of ex-
plaining terms used in tariff sheet when goods are inserted by
name presumed to be known by the trade. Hurlburt v. Lake
Shore R. Co. (I. S. C. C.). 596.
Competing lines. Distance. Although distance from Lincoln to Chi-
cago by Burlington system is 106 per cent. of distance to
Omaha, in estimating freight rates from Chicago to Lincoln, Bur-
lington Co. are not limited to a rate equal to 100 per cent. of rate
|