55 Kan. 83 | Kan. | 1895
The opinion of the court was delivered by
: Upon the trial the plaintiff below was permitted to testify to the amount of damages
Again, it was error for the trial court to permit the plaintiff below to testify to the statements made by Mr. Walsh, the baggage agent of the railroad company, concerning alleged statements of the bag-gagemen to him about the trunk. (Tennis v. Rapid Transit Rly. Co., 45 Kas. 503; Adams v. H. & St. J. Rld. Co., 74 Mo. 553, 556 ; Wellington v. B. & M. Rld. Co., 33 N. E. Rep. [ Mass.] 393 ; Carroll v. E. T. V. & G. Rly. Co., 41 Am. & Eng. Rld. Cas. 307, 310, 311; N. H. Rld. Co. v. May, 27 id. 152, 153 ; Hough v. Doyle, 4 Rawle, 291, 294 Luby v. H. R. Rld. Co., 17 N. Y. 131; Pa. Rld. Co. v. Brooks, 57 Pa. St. 339, 343.) The declarations of the baggagemen, unless they constituted a part of the res gestae, do not bind the company.
The bill of particulars contains a verified account, but the court seems to have treated the case on the trial as an action to recover damages occasioned by a tort. A party may waive a tort and sue on an account for the value of articles taken, or which in some way have been of benefit to the defendant; but where goods have been damaged and retained by the owner, if he
The judgment will be reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.