-Continued.

horse in transitu.

Galliers v. Chicago, B. & Q.
R. Co. (Iowa), 28.
Striking out allegation as to
cost of horse, in action for
its loss.

Galliers v. Chicago, B. & Q.

R. Co. (Iowa), 28.
Sufficiency of evidence in ac-
tion for injury to live stock
in transitu.

Susong v. Florida Cent. &

P. R. Co. (Ga.), 48.
Sufficiency of evidence to show
that plaintiff was not obliged
to receive cattle reaching
their destination at midnight
and put in an insecure pen,
although plaintiff did not
have money with him for
freight charges.

Houston & T. C. Ry. Co. v.
Trammell (Tex.), 685.

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
See Common Carriers.

Damages.

Personal Injuries.
Tickets and Fares.
Trespassers.

Absence of statutory number of
brakemen, question for jury.
Comerford v. New York, etc.,

R. Co. (Mass), 130.

ย.

Absolute duty of company to
protect prospective passenger
from insults of station agent.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.
Admissibility of evidence of
change in method of operating
trains, harmless error.
Prescott & N. W. Ry. Co. v.

Smith (Ark.), 809.
Admissibility of evidence that
father gave son car fare, in
action for injury sustained by
latter while crossing track to
board car.

Chicago & E. I. R. Co. v. Hus-

ton (Ill.). 141.
Allegations as to cause of acci-
dent to passenger rendered
immaterial by admission of
the establishment of prima
facie case.

McNeill v. Durham & C. R.

Co. (N. Car.), 707,
Alleged passenger on freight
train presumptively a tres-
passer.

Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 711.

-Continued.

Application of Arkansas statute
prescribing method of making
up passenger train.

Prescott & N. W. Ry. Co. v.
Smith (Ark.), 809.
Burden of proof where defend-
ant company admitted that
plaintiff was entitled to actual
damages.

Louisville & N. R. Co. v.
Champion (Ky.), 732.

Care required in keeping car
steps and platform free from
ice and snow.

Herbert v. St. Paul City Ry.

Co. (Minn.), 152.

Carrier under no duty to passen-
ger to keep in safe condition
depot platform used exclu-
sively for freight.

Houston, E. & W. T. Ry. Co.
v. Grubbs (Tex.), 754.
Company cannot be compelled
to operate road at actual loss.
Jack v. Williams (S. Car.), 10.
Contributory Negligence.

Alighting at other places than
station, insufficiency of evi-
dence.

St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Farr (Ark), 762.
Alighting from moving car.
Brown 7. New York, N. H.
& H. R. Co. (Mass.), 143.
Pence v. Wabash R. Co.
(Iowa). 77.

Alighting from moving car in
obedience to direction of
employee.

Pence V. Wabash R. Co.
(Iowa), 77.

Alighting from moving car,
question for jury.

Comerford v. New York,

etc., R. Co. (Mass.), 130.
Alighting from moving train.
Lindsay v. Southern Ry. Co.
(Ga.), 748.

Boarding moving train.

Pence v. Wabash R. Co.
(Iowa), 77.

Boarding moving train in obe-
dience to direction of em-
ployee.

Pence v. Wabash R. Co.
(Iowa), 77.

Boy assisting passenger in
jumping from moving train.
Oxsher v. Houston, E. & W.
T. Ry. Co. (Tex.), 727.
Boy assisting passenger to
board train getting off after

-Continued.

starting of train.

Oxsher v. Houston, E. & W.
T. Ky. Co. (Tex.), 727.
Boy 16 years of age not inca-
pable of sufficient discretion
to avoid extending part of
person beyond car line.
Benedict v. Minneapolis &

St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701.
Burden of proof of due care on
plaintiff in action for injury
to passenger caused by
alighting from moving car.
Brown v. New York, N. H. &

H. R. Co. (Mass.), 143.
Failure to look and listen
before crossing track to
board car.

Chicago & E. I. R. Co. v.
Huston (Ill.), 141.
Leaving car for some purpose
not incident to journey.
Chicago, etc., Ry. Co. v. Sat-
tler (Neb.), 688.

Negro compelled to ride on
platform of crowded car of
excursion train.

Williams v. International &

G. N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.
Passenger alighting from
moving train at invitation of
conductor was not guilty of
contributory negligence.
Johnson v. Atlantic & N. C.

R. Co. (N. Car.), 770,
Passenger not deprived of right
of visiting dining car by his
knowledge of existence of an
unvestibuled s eeper in train.
Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v.

Adams (C. C. A ), 734.
Passenger riding on platform

of caboose to avoid danger.
Prescott & N. W. Ry. Co. v.

Smith (Ark.), 809.
Prima facie case of contribu-
tory negligence not estab-
lished by evidence of misstep
of passenger while alighting.
Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Gard-
ner (C. C. A.), 759.
Riding with part of person
extended beyond car line.
Benedict v. Minneapolis &

St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701.
Riding with part of person
extended beyond car line as
affected by fact that cars
were overcrowded and pas-
senger was required to ride
on platform.

Benedict v. Minneapolis &
St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701.

-Continued.

Sufficiency of evidence to show
contributory negligence of
youth 16 years of age riding
with head extended beyond
side of moving train.
Benedict v. Minneapolis &

St. L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701.
Walking on track to board car.
Spavin v. Lake Shore & M.
S. Ry. Co. (Mich.), 135.

Damages.
Elements of damages for
injury to passenger, appre-
hension of insanity.

Walker v. Boston & M. R. R.

(N. H.), 80.

Evidence of mental suffering
of passengers properly ex-
cluded where no personal
injury was shown.
Smith v. Wilmington & W.
R. Co. (N. Car.), 772.
Excessive verdict.

Herbert v. St. Paul City Ry.

Co. (Minn.), 152.

Excessive verdict for injury to
passenger.

Pence v. Wabash R. Co.
(Iowa), 77.

Excessive verdict for injury to
passenger, question for jury.
Loker v. Southwestern Mis-

souri Electric Ry. Co.
(Mo.), 132.

Extra fare only could be recov-
ered where passenger ejected
by mistake of conductor to
whom he refused to pay fare.
Brown v. Rapid Ry. Co.

(Mich.), 819.

Mental and physical suffering
as elements of damages for
injury to passenger.

Walker v. Boston & M. R. R.
(N. H.), 80.
Punitive damages cannot be
recovered for employees' acts
unless they are willful, wan-
ton, or malicious, and in the
line of his employment.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.
Punitive damages, error to
submit question to jury in
action for failure to stop
train at flag station.

Yazoo & M. V. R. Co. v.
Faust (Miss.), 818.
Punitive damages, instruction
not warranted by evidence
in action for insulting pro-
spective passenger in wait-
ing room.

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
-Continued.

St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.
Punitive damages, passengers
leaving train because of con-
ductor's mistaken refusal to
accept ticket.

Louisville & N. R. Co. v.
Champion (Ky.), 732.
Right of husband to recovery
for mental anguish of wife
separated from children.
International & G. N. R.

Co. v. Anchonda (Tex.),
788.

Sufficiency of evidence of
nature of passenger's inju-
ries.

Nicholson v. Northern Pac.
Ry. Co. (C. C. A.), 751.
Degree of care.

Williams v. International & G.
N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.
Degree of care required in stop-
ping street car.

Freeman v. Metropolitan St.

Ry. Co. (Mo.), 582.

Degree of care required of street
railroad company.
Citizens' Ry. Co.
(Tex.), 516.

v. Craig

Duty of carrier to keep distant
corner of depot grounds in
good condition.

Davis v. Houston, E. & W. T.

Ry. Co. (Tex.), 800.

Duty of carrier to one entering
train with understanding with
conductor not to pay fare.
Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 711.

Duty of street railway company
to discharge passenger at safe
place.

Sweet v. Louisville Ry. Co.
(Ky.), 768.

Duty to furnish safe place to
ride.

Benedict v. Minneapolis & St.
L. R. Co. (Minn.), 701.

Duty to heat waiting room.
St. Louis. etc., Ry. Co. v.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.
Duty to inform passenger that
stop is not for station.

St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Farr (Ark.), 762.
Duty to light depot grounds.

Davis v. Houston, E. & W. T.
Ry. Co. (Tex.), 800.
Duty to protect prospective
passenger from insults from

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
-Continued.

persons in waiting room.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.

Effect of knowledge of facts sug-
gesting inquiry as to whether
passengers may ride on freight
train.

Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 711.

Ejection of Passengers.

Person riding on freight train
without permit, relying on
representations of agent
which he knows to be false.
Houston, E. & W. T. Ry. Co.
v. Stell (Tex.), 722.
Presumption that requirement
of conductor was legal where
passenger was ejected for
nonpayment of street rail-
way fare.

Smith v. Indianapolis St.
Ry. Co. (Ind.), 116.
Sufficiency of evidence to show
place of ejection.

Gaukler v. Detroit, G. H. &
M. Ry. Co. (Mich.), 806.

Evidence.
Error in admitting evidence
as to wrecks happening on
trains in charge of engineer
whose competency has been
proven.

McNeill v Durham & C. R.

Co. (N. Car.), 707.

Of outcries of other passengers
in action for injury to pas-
senger caused by collision.
Louisville & N. R. Co. v.
Simpson (Ky.), 513.

Outcries of other injured pas-
sengers as res gestæ.

Louisville & N. R. Co. v.

Carothers (Ky.), 750.
Hack driver properly joined as
defendant in action against
railway company for injury to
hack passenger.

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v.

Durand (Kan.), 519.

Harmless error in admitting evi-
dence as to extent of passen-
ger's injuries.

Loker v. Southwestern Mis-
souri Electric Ry. Co. (Mo.),
132.
Instruction as to liability of
carrier erroneous because re-
quiring coincident freedom
from negligence on the defend-
ant's part and contributory

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
-Continued.

negligence on the part of
plaintiff's injured wife.
International & G. N. R. Co.
v. Anchonda (Tex.), 788.
Instruction as to negligence in
failing to heat waiting room
not erroneous as making car-
rier an insurer.

St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.
Instruction not warranted by
evidence, in action for injury
caused by derailment.

McNeill v. Durham & C. R.

Co. (N. Car.), 707.
Insufficiency of evidence to show
negligence in action for injury
to prospective passenger caused
by failure to light depot.

Davis v. Houston, etc., Ry. Co.
(Tex.), 800.

Interest in actions ex delicto
cannot be recovered.

Southern Ry. Co. v. Horner
(Ga.), 47.

Intoxication, not negligence as
matter of law to leave ejected
intoxicated passenger at cer-
tain point.

Gaukler v. Detroit, G. H. & M.

Ry. Co. (Mich.), 806.
Jurisdiction to order destruction

of road and sale of materials
where its operation would be
at an actual loss.

Jack v. Williams (S. Car.), 10.
Liability for assault on passen-
ger by conductor.

Johnson v. Detroit, Y. & A. A.

Ry. (Mich.), 827.
Liability for injury to boy
assisting passengers caused by
getting off train after it is
started as affected by fact that
trainmen had not been notified
that he was not a passenger.
Oxsher v. Houston, E. & W.
T. Ry. Co. (Tex.), 727.
Liability for injury to passenger
compelled to ride on platform
of swaying car.

Williams v. International &
G. N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.
Liability for injury to passenger
in station of terminal company
where carrier had not con-
tracted for use of separate
portion of station.

Frazier v. New York, N. H. &

H. R. Co. (Mass.), 814.

CARRIERS OF PASSENGERS
-Continued.

conductor having apparent
authority.

Spence v. Chicago, R. I. & P.
Ry. Co. (Iowa), 822.
Liability for refusal to unlock
station room.

St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.
Liability for willful and wanton
and malicious acts of em-
ployees to passenger.
St. Louis, etc., Ry. Co. v.
Wilson (Ark.), 793.

Limiting Liability.

Contract exempting company
from liability for any injury
to person did not extend to
passenger's death.

Northern Pac. Ry. Co. v.
Adams (C. C. A.), 734.
Limits of depot premises under
Mississippi Code prohibiting
the backing of trains near
passenger depots beyond à
certain speed.

King v. Illinois Cent. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 875.
Negligence in starting train.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Gardner
(C. C. A.), 759.
Negligence of company in run-
ning vestibuled train with
some unprotected platforms, at
unusual speed, question for
the jury.

Northern Pac. Ry. Co. V.

Adams (C. C. A.), 734.
Nonsuit properly ordered in
action for carrying passenger
beyond destination, where she
was a woman accompanied by
her children, and it was rain-
ing.

Smith v. Wilmington & W. R.
Co. (N. Car.), 772.

One entering train with under-
standing with conductor not to
pay fare a trespasser.

Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 711.

One riding on train prohibited
from carrying passengers a
trespasser.

Purple v. Union Pac. R. Co.
(C. C. A.), 711.

Pain and suffering as elements
of damages in action for injury
to passenger.

Wabash R. Co.

Passengers actually on train
whether it is moving or not is

-Continued.

being "transported over road,"
within meaning of Nebraska
statute.

Chicago, etc., Ry. Co. v. Sat-

tler (Neb.), 688.
Passenger leaving car for a
purpose not incident to journey
is not being "transported over
road," within meaning of Ne-
braska statute.

Chicago, etc., Ry. Co.

V.

Sattler (Neb.), 688.
Presumption of negligence from
injury to passenger.

Texas & P. Ry. Co. v. Gardner
(C. C. A.), 759.

Question for jury as to negli-
gence in overcrowding excur-
sion train.

Williams v. International & G.

N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.
Question for jury whether street
railway passenger was dis-
charged at dangerous place.
Sweet v. Louisville Ry. Co.
(Ky.), 768.

Question for jury whether there
was negligence in overcrowd-
ing excursion train, where
negro was injured by reason of
having to ride on platform of
swaying car.

Williams v. International & G.

N. R. Co. (Tex.), 778.
Question of fitness of place of
ejection of passenger elimi-
nated where he was injured at
a point 25 or 30 feet distant.
Gaukler v. Detroit, G. H. & M.
Ry. Co. (Mich.), 806.

Right of passenger to leave train
on account of business
curiosity.

or

Chicago, R. I. & P. Ry. Co. v.
Sattler (Neb.), 688.

Sufficiency of evidence of negli-
gence where passenger slipped
on ice and snow on car steps
and platform.

Herbert v. St. Paul City Ry.
Co. (Minn.), 152.

Sufficiency of evidence to show
invitation from agent to cross
depot grounds to purchase
ticket.

Davis v. Houston, E. & W. T.
Ry. Co. (Tex.), 800.
Sufficiency of evidence to show
that passenger left a car for
some purpose not incident to
his journey so as to be unable
to claim protection of Nebraska

-Continued.

International & G. N. R. Co. v.
Anchonda (Tex.), 788.

Tickets and Fares.

Excursion ticket construed to
embody contract entitling
holder to transportation be-
tween certain points.
International & G. N. R. Co.
v. Ing (Tex.), 746.
Passenger was not obliged to
prove that defendant exe-
cuted and issued ticket where
no plea of non est factum.
International & G. N. R. Co.

v. Ing (Tex.), 746.
Ticket not having printed
notice provided for by Texas
statute not transferable.
International & G. N. R. Co.

v. Ing (Tex.), 746.

Ticket prima facie evidence of
right to carriage between
certain points.

International & G. N. R. Co.
v. Ing (Tex.), 746.
Tickets transferable.

International & G. N. R. Co.
v. Ing (Tex.), 746.
Utmost human skill, diligence
and foresight not required in
stopping street railway car.
Freeman v. Metropolitan St.
Ry. Co. (Mo.), 584.

CARS.

See Carriers of Freight.
Master and Servant.

CAR STEPS.

See Carriers of Passengers.

CATTLE CHUTE.

See Master and Servant.

CATTLE GUARDS.

See Stock, Injuries to.