New Orleans Great Northern Railroad v. Fortenberry

Mississippi Supreme Court March 15, 1914

New Orleans Great Northern Railroad v. Fortenberry, 107 Miss. 79 (Miss. 1914)

64 So. 966

Cook

Opinion of the Court

Cook, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Appellee sued appellant for personal injuries inflicted upon him by the alleged negligence of appellant’s servants in the operation of one of its trains between Slidell, Louisiana, and Jackson, Mississippi, upon which train ap-pellee was a passenger. The jury awarded one thousand •dollars as damages, and from the judgment on that ver•dict this appeal is prosecuted.

*84It is contended that the cause of action arose in Louisiana, and that the action was barred by the one-year statute of limitations of that state. This defense was set up by proper plea, to which appellee demurred,, and his demurrer was sustained. The declaration charges that appellant is a Mississippi corporation, and that its line of' railroad begins at a point in this state and terminates at a point in Louisiana, and this is not denied. We think the demurrer was properly sustained, and that section 3114, Code of 1906, has no application. Railroad Co. v. Pool, 72 Miss. 487, 16 So. 753.

It is further insisted that the peremptory instruction asked by defendant below should have been given by the trial court because the evidence at the trial shows that-plaintiff’s injury was caused by his own negligence.

We have carefully considered the evidence and cannot say that the court erred in submitting the issue of contributory negligence to the arbitrament of the jury.

Affirmed..

Reference

Full Case Name: New Orleans Great Northern Railroad Co. v. John Fortenberry
Cited By: 4 cases
Status: Published
Syllabus: Limitation of Actions. Code 1906, section 3114. Applicability. Section 3114, Code 1906, providing that suit cannot he maintained in this state on a cause of action accrued in another state, where defendant has resided before residing in this state, if under the statute of limitations in that state, the action cannot there be maintained, applies only where a nonresident, in whose favor the statute had accrued, afterwards removes into this state, and hence a railroad company which, during the period pleaded as a bar, was operating a railroad in this state and therefore sueable as a resident here, cannot plead said statute against an action brought in this state for personal injury inflicted in another state, where the statute of limitations would, if suit were there brought, bar the action.