Burnett v. Riter
276 S.W. 347, 1925 Tex. App. LEXIS 818 (1925)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A common carrier's liability for passenger baggage is that of a bailee required to exercise reasonable care, not that of a strict insurer, when the passenger does not surrender complete and exclusive possession of the baggage to the carrier.
Facts:
- Defendant Riter operated a 'jitney line,' a passenger car service for hire, between Terrell and Tyler, Texas.
- Riter's vehicles were equipped with a rack attached to the running board for carrying passenger baggage.
- The plaintiff became a passenger on Riter's jitney and asked the driver where to place his hand bag.
- The driver offered the plaintiff the choice to carry the bag inside the car or place it on the external rack.
- The plaintiff deferred to the driver, who then placed the plaintiff's leather hand bag on the rack next to another passenger's old paper hand bag.
- During the journey, some passengers were smoking and discarding cigarette stubs out of the car near the baggage.
- A passerby alerted the driver that the baggage on the rack was on fire.
- The plaintiff's hand bag and its contents were partially destroyed by the fire, which appeared to have spread from the adjacent paper bag.
Procedural Posture:
- The plaintiff sued defendant Riter in the justice court of Kaufman County, Texas, to recover the value of a lost hand bag.
- The justice court, sitting without a jury, rendered a judgment in favor of the defendant, Riter.
- The plaintiff appealed the judgment to the county court of Kaufman County.
- A jury in the county court, answering a single special issue, found in favor of the defendant, and the court entered judgment accordingly.
- The plaintiff, as plaintiff in error, prosecuted a writ of error to the Court of Civil Appeals of Texas against the defendant, Riter, as defendant in error.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Is a common carrier, such as a jitney operator, liable as an insurer for passenger baggage that is placed on an external rack of the vehicle and not taken into the carrier's exclusive possession and control?
Opinions:
Majority - O'Quinn, J.
No, a common carrier like a jitney operator is not liable as an insurer for baggage that is not within its exclusive control; liability is instead based on negligence. Although Riter's jitney line qualifies as a common carrier, the heightened liability of an insurer only attaches when a passenger surrenders 'absolutely complete and exclusive possession, custody, and control of the baggage to the carrier.' The court analogized the jitney to a street railway, where the nature of the transportation service precludes the carrier from taking exclusive control over baggage. Because the driver's duties and the vehicle's design prevent such exclusive control, the carrier does not assume the risk of an insurer. Instead, the carrier acts as a bailee, and its duty is to exercise reasonable care to prevent loss or damage. The case was remanded because the trial court improperly restricted the jury's negligence inquiry to only whether the driver's own cigarette directly caused the fire, failing to consider other potential acts of negligence.
Analysis:
This decision is significant for adapting traditional common carrier liability principles to the then-emerging technology of automobile transport. By classifying the jitney operator's duty as one of reasonable care rather than strict insurer liability, the court established a crucial precedent for services where passengers retain partial control or access to their baggage. This ruling distinguishes such services from railroads with dedicated baggage cars and shapes the liability framework for modern transportation like buses and shared-ride services. The case underscores that the carrier's level of liability is directly proportional to its degree of exclusive control over the property.
