White v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
White v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
Opinion of the Court
This was a suit to recover of the defendant corn-pan}'- damages to the plaintiff’s feelings resulting from negligent delay in delivering a telegram from the plaintiff’s sister announcing the illness of plaintiff’s father and requesting him to “come on first train,” his father having died two days after the telegram was sent and before the plaintiff could reach his dying parent’s bed side, which he could have reached in ample time if the telegram had been promptly delivered.
The answer is a general denial and the special defense that as the message was sent on the Company’s blanks “subject to the terms on the back thereof,” the plaintiff can recover no more than, the amount specified in those terms which is stipulated to be “the amount received (by the Company) for sending the same.”
There was judgment for the plaintiff for one thousand dollars and defendant appeals, the appellee therein by answer praying that the judgment be increased to two thousand dollars, the amount sued for. The facts are that on Sunday, July 19th, 1903, at 7:30 o’clock p. m. there was received for transmission at the defendant’s office in Opelika, Ala., a telegram in the following words:
H. W. White,
322 Hennen Building,
New Orleans.
Pa very sick; come on first train.
MATTIE.
This message was opened by Mr. Dean and by him repeated to Mr. White at Bainbridge, Georgia, who received it between 1 and 2 o’clock p. m. of July 22. When the plaintiff /eceived this last message repeated to him by Dean he at once took the train for Opelika but when he reached the latter place his father was dead and the funeral was on the road to the cemetery. He stopped a carriage, entered it and went to the Cemetery to see his father buried. Had the telegram of July 19th been delivered to him at the place indicated “322 Hennen Building” on the following morning, Monda)'-, July 20th, he would have certainly gone on to Opelika and would have been with his father whilst life was still in him.
It appears that this unfortunate mistake on the part of the defendant company was in assuming that the Mr. White, whose address they found in the City directory to be 5008 Pitt street, was the Mr. White for whom the telegram was intended and in not, in any event, returning on Monday morning, July 20th, to 322 Hennen Building and again make an effort to deliver the message. Had the Company done so it would have been successful, for the Mr. White for whom the message was intended was not the Mr. White of 5008 Pitt street, and whose office the directory showed was on Gravier St., but was the plaintiff who did have an office, or rather who had desk room, in the office of his friend, a Mr. Dean, who rented and occupied the of ficé “No. 322 Hennen Building.” At this office the plaintiff transacted all his business when in the City of New Orleans. His mail and telegrams came and in his absence they are opened by Dean, who, being informed of plaintiff’s movements, keeps him advised of his business concerns here and repeats telegraphic messages to him.
Plaintiff was in the City on Sunday night, July 19th, 1903, of course not at his office. He was here all day Monday, the 20tfy
If he had received this message he would have taken the train at Once for Opelika and have seen his father alive. The failure to make delivery on Monday was in our judgment, gross negligence on the part of the Company and under the authority of Graham vs. Western Union Telegraph Co. 109 La. 1069 the plaintiff is entitled to damages for the mental anguish which he suffered. As said in Graham’s case, supra, the extent of the distress and sorrow in cases of this character may not be susceptible of direct or exact measurement, but enough certainty and knowledge of the situation can be established through the introduction of testimony to furnish the basis for a verdict or a judgment; the fact'itself of a violation of a legal right can in many instances support an action for damages without the necessity of proof of the latter.
' The evidence in this case sufficiently establishes the basis for the amount fixed by our esteemed brother of the District Court and as he had the advantage of seeing the plaintiff and hearing him testify, and could thus judge the value of plaintiff’s testimony as to the extent of his anguish, he is as fully, if indeed not better qualified to fix the amount of damages in this case, as is any appellate Court. In cases of this character the verdict of a jury or judgment of Court is entitled to great weight and will not be disturbed unless manifestly erroneous. The lower judge has assessed the damages at one thousand dollars, which we will neither increase nor diminish.
The judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.