Curtis v. Avon, Geneseo & Mount Morris Railroad

A service of a summons on a director of a corporation is regular, and will give the court complete jurisdiction of the parties. An agent of a railroad corporation, having charge of a depot, and the freight therein, is the proper person to inquire of, respecting lost baggage; and his answer is part of the evidence of the loss, and admissible, as res gesta. So, in -regard to an arrangement between a passenger and the baggage master, at a station, that the baggage of the former may remain at the depot, and that the latter will see to it until it can be sent for. In an action by a pas^nger, against a railroad company, to recover for lost baggage, evidence to gliow that the passenger was lame, and unable to take charge of his baggage, personally, is admissible, as tending to prove that he was guilty of no negligence in not calling for, and taking charge of, his baggage, upon the arrival at his place of destination; and as furnishing a good reason for making an arrangement with the agents of the railroad company that it should remain in the custody of the company until called for. Where a passenger, on arriving at his destination, neglects to look after his baggage, and negligently leaves it, without any arrangement that the carrier shall retain it for him, and it is lost while thus situated, without fault on the part of the carrier, the latter is not liable. But where there is no delivery of baggage carried upon a railroad, to the passenger, and no neglect to claim it, or inquire for it, but on the contrary the company’s agents agree to retain it until it can be sent for, the company’s liability as a common carrier continues after the baggage is taken from the cars, and until it is delivered or tendered to the owner.

THIS action was commenced before a justice of the peace of Livingston county, to recover of the defendant the value of certain baggage belonging ■ to the plaintiff delivered to the defendant for transportation as a carrier, and claimed to have been lost, through its negligence. The facts were these : The plaintiff’s minor son, a cripple, unable to carry his baggage, was placed on board the defendants’ cars at Avon, and his fare paid to Mount Morris ; on arriving at that place, the son informed the baggage man that he could not take away his baggage until he could go home, and his father would come after it. The plaintiff was not at home when his son arrived, on Saturday afternoon, but came home between that time and Monday, and on Monday morning went to the station for the baggage and it was not to be found. The keeper of the station house had put the baggage into the room occupied by passengers, where they usually left baggage and allowed any person to take baggage away. The doors Were open in the day time, and the station man was absent, occasionally, from the room. There was a warehouse attached to the depot, but- the baggage was not put into the warehouse. On the trial the plaintiff was called and sworn as a witness in his own behalf, and testified as follows : “ I reside in*Mt. Morris. I had a son at Avon last fall on account of his health. He went on the defendants’ road to Avon. They run trains regularly from Mount Morris to Avon and hack every day. My son is 13 years of age. He came from Avon home the latter part of September last. He had baggage ; I was not at home when he returned. I came home soon after, and went to the railroad depot. I here saw Mr. Booth. He is an agent at the depot for the company, and takes charge of the station. There is a building at the station, called the depot, at Mount Morris ; this is what he is in charge of for the company.” The plaintiff here proposed to show what was said by Booth to witness, and what took place in relation to this baggage. The defendants objected to the plaintiff proving what was said hy Booth to the plaintiff in relation to this baggage. Objection overruled by the court and the witness was allowed to answer. The defendants excepted. Answer. “ I was there on the Monday following my son’s return home, I think. I asked Booth for the baggage; he said he did not know any thing about it; we then went and looked for it in the wareroom ; told him what it was done up in ; he then said he remembered it, saw it when it went down to Avon, but said he could not find it; told me he never had had it.” The plaintiff here proposed to prove by the witness that his minor son is a cripple and unable to have taken away his baggage. Objected to as immaterial. Objection overruled by the court and evidence admitted. Defendants excepted. * •H. H. Curtis, the plaintiff’s son testified that after his arrival at the Mount Morris depot he had a conversation with William Leming, the baggage man, about his baggage, and asked him if he would not see to his baggage ; and that Leming said he would. This testimony was objected to, but admitted by the court. The only proof of service of the summons was by the Constable, who certified that he personally served the same on George S. Whitney, one of the directors of the Avon, Geneseo and Mt. Morris Railroad Company at a specified date. The plaintiff recovered a judgment for $45 and costs. On appeal to the county court of Livingston county, the judgment of the justice was affirmed, and the defendants appealed to this court, from the judgment of the county court.