Hudson v. Mississippi Central Railroad

Mississippi Supreme Court March 15, 1909

Hudson v. Mississippi Central Railroad, 95 Miss. 41 (Miss. 1909)

48 So. 289

Fletcher

Opinion of the Court

Fletcher, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The second count of the declaration is drawn under section 1985 of the Code of 1906, and states a perfectly good cause of action. - It states, in effect, that plaintiff’s intestate was an employe of the defendant railroad company, and was killed by reason-of the train being derailed. It was not necessary to state more than this in order to put the company upon the defensive. The demurrer being a general one, it was manifest error to sustain it in the face of the second count.

We do not deem it necessary to pass upon the question presented by the first count, since it is obvious that the demurrer was improperly sustained.

Reversed and remanded.

Reference

Full Case Name: Andrew C. Hudson v. Mississippi Central Railroad Company
Cited By: 3 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: 1. Railroads. Injury resulting from moving cars. Code 1906, § 1985. Pleadings. Under Code 1906, § 1985, providing that, in actions against a railroad for injuries to employes, proof of injury inflicted hy the running of the locomotives or cars of the railroad shall he prima fade evidence of want of reasonable care, a declaration in an action hy a parent for the death of his son, which alleges that the son was an employe of defendant, a railroad company, and was killed hy the derailment of the train, states a cause of action as against a general demurrer. 2. Supreme Court Practice. Declaration. Two counts. One good. Demurrer to entire declaration. Where the demurrer to a declaration containing two counts was improperly sustained as to one count, the court, on appeal from the ruling on the demurrer, will not pass on. the question presented hy the other count.