CAMPBELL V. PULLMAN P AI,ACE-CAR
.(Circuit Court. N. D. Iowa, W. D. May 9,1890.)
1. SLEEPING-CAR COMPANIES-AsSAULT BY EMPLOYE-LIABILITY 011' COMPANY. The Pullman Palace-Car Company is liable for injuries sustained by occupants
of its sleeping-cars through the negligence or willful misconduct of the employe whom it places in charge of the oar. . Wher&theporter placed in oharge of such a oar by the comllsny makes an inde. oent assault on a female occupant thereof, she is entitled to from the company a fair pecuniarr compensation :tor all injuries, temporary or permanent, directly caused to her In her person. health, and strength, includingcompeusation for the pain andsu:ffering, mental and physical, which has been, or may thereafter be, oaused.
Action for damages for assault. Joy, Hudson, Call & Joy, for plaintiff. Hubbard & Spaulding and John S. Runnels, for defendant. ". .
SH):RAS, J., (charging jury.) In the cause now on trial before you, the plaintiff, Mrs. Campbell, claims damages against the defendant, the Pullman Palace-Car Company, in the sum of $20,000, for injuries which she claims were caused to her when she was an occupant of a sleepingca.rfUrnished by defendant, for use as a sleeping-car upon a train of pasoperated by the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company between Chicago, Ill., and Sioux City, Iowa, such injurie!! being,alleged to have been caused by the misconduct of the porter emplayed. by the defendant upon said sleeping-car. Before passing to a sta,tElI:;nent of the particular issues to be submitted to you in this cause, itisproper fDr me to instruct you as to the relation existing between the Pullplan Car Companyaild persons occupying the sleeping-cars furnished by the. defendant company for the use of the traveling public. As I construe the contract between the defendant and the Chicago, Milwaukee &.St·.Paul Railway Company, the Pullman Company agrees to furnish of the public what are commonly known as "sleeping-cars," which, when in use. form part of the train run by the railway company for the t,l,'ansportation of passengers along the line of railway. The Pullman Com,ml.llY, by thus furnishipg cars to be used as sleeping.cars by the traveling public, dqes not'assu,me towards. the persons occllpying such cars. thj:l relation of a common carrier. It does not undertake the duty transporting the passenger to his destination. That duty is assumed by"the railway company, and for the performance thereof the passenger must look to the company managing the railway; and the Pullman Company is not liable for injuries received by the occupants of its cars from accidents connected with the movement of the train. Nor is it responsible for the negligence or misconduct of those persons charged with the duty of operating the train of which the sleeping-cars may form part. 'While, however, it assumes no responsibility for the mere transportation of the persons occupying its cars, and does not occupy the re-
CAMPBELL'll. PULLMAN PALACE-CAR CO.
lation of a common carrier to them, it nevertheless does assume certain duties and obligations to its patrons, and becomes bound to the exercise of reasonable care in the performance thereof. The Pullman Company, by its mode of managing these sleeping-cars, represents to the traveling public that they may be occupied with reasona1:>le safety and comfort as sleeping-ears; and, by receiving pay for the use thereof, the company agrees with its patrons that it will exercise ordinary care to secure the comfort and safety of tbose using the same for the purposes for which such cars are furnished. The person or persons placed in charge of such sleeping-cars by the Pullman Company is bound, as an employe of the company, to the exercise of ordinary care for the protection and comfort of persons using such car in accordance with the regulation of the company; and if such person, either through failure to exercise proper care, or by willful misconduct on his part, permits or causes injury to happen to an occupant of the sleeping-car placed under his charge, the Pullman Company will be liable for the damages ca.,used thereby. In the answer filed in this case, the defendant admits that on the 15th and 16th days of February, 1889, it was engaged in operating a sleeping-car on the line of the Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Company between Chicago, Ill., and Sioux City, Iowa, iIi connection with the regular passenger train reaching Sioux City in the morning, and admits that the plaintiff was a passenger upon the passenger train in question, and had purchased and paid for a ticket from defendant for a seat and berth in said sleeping-car belonging to defendant. There is no conflict in the testimony adduced by the parties plaintiff and defendant touching the fact that the plaintiff was an occupant of the sleeping-car which left Chicago on the 15th, and reached Sioux City on the morning of the 16th of February, 1889. It thus appears that the plaintiff was rightfully an occupant of. said sleeping-car at the time named; and, while it was being conveyed to Sioux City, the plaintiff was entitled to demand of- the defendant the exercise on its part of ordinary care to secure to her the safe and comfortable use of said sleeping-car, and its conveniences, for the purpose for which said car was placed in said train. In the performance of its duty in this respect, the defendant company would be responsible for the. willful misconduct, if any such there was, of its own employes placed in charge of said sleeping-car, when such misconduct was of such nature as to interfere with the safe and comfort;.. able use of Said car by the plaintiff for sleeping-car purposes. On part of plaintiff, it is charged that the porter employed by the defendant and placed in said car, did. in the morning of said 16th of February, 1889, between the station of Manilla and Sioux City, make an indecent assault upon plaintiff while she was occupying the berth assigned to her,-placing his hands upon her person;.making indecent proposals to her, and exposing his person before her. On part of the defendant, it is denied that the porter did thus misconduct himself j that, while it is true that the porter did go to plaintiff's .berth, he did so for the purpose of arousing her from an un(\asy sleep, and awakenedhet in the usual manner, .and that plaintiff, not being accustomed to travel-