Houck v. Southern Pac. Ry. Co.
1888 U.S. App. LEXIS 2753, 38 F. 226 (1888)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A common carrier that enforces racial segregation must provide accommodations for colored passengers that are as safe and substantially as comfortable as those provided for white passengers. Failure to provide such accommodations, especially when coupled with abusive treatment by employees, renders the carrier liable for damages.
Facts:
- Mrs. Houck, a woman with some degree of negro blood, purchased a first-class train ticket from the defendant railway company to travel from Victoria to Rosenburg, Texas.
- The train had two passenger cars: a rear car exclusively for white people and a front 'Jim Crow Car' for colored people, which was also a smoking car with inferior seating.
- A brakeman repeatedly and rudely denied Mrs. Houck entry into the whites-only car, locking the door and verbally abusing her.
- The conductor also refused her entry and directed her to the 'Jim Crow Car,' which she found occupied by boisterous and drinking passengers of both races.
- Refusing the inferior and unsafe conditions of the 'Jim Crow Car,' Mrs. Houck rode the entire 90-mile journey on the open train platform on a rainy September day.
- During the journey, the brakeman pushed Mrs. Houck, causing her to fall against the brake wheel, tore her dress, and threw her pot of plants from the train.
- As a result of the exposure and stressful ordeal, Mrs. Houck claimed she suffered a miscarriage and other illnesses.
Procedural Posture:
- Plaintiff Mrs. Houck sued the defendant railway company in federal trial court, claiming $7,500 in damages for personal injury.
- The case was tried before a jury.
- The jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, awarding $3,000 for actual damages and $2,000 for punitive damages.
- The defendant railway company filed a motion for a new trial.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a railway company's failure to provide a colored passenger holding a first-class ticket with accommodations substantially equal to those provided for white passengers, coupled with abusive treatment by its employees, make the company liable for damages?
Opinions:
Majority - Boarman, J.
Yes, a railway company is liable for damages when it fails to provide substantially equal accommodations and its employees treat a passenger abusively. While a common carrier may segregate passengers by race, it is charged with the duty of furnishing colored passengers who pay first-class fare with a car that is as safe and substantially as comfortable as the one furnished to white passengers. The evidence showed the 'Jim Crow Car' was not substantially equal to the whites-only car in comfort or safety. Furthermore, the brakeman treated Mrs. Houck, who acted in a 'lady-like manner,' rudely, wrongfully, and maliciously. The company ratified this conduct by promoting the brakeman instead of disciplining him. While the court finds that Mrs. Houck's own negligence in remaining on the platform contributed to her physical illness, the company is still liable for the humiliation and wrongful treatment she endured, justifying punitive damages.
Analysis:
This case exemplifies the judicial application of the 'separate but equal' doctrine to common carriers before its eventual demise. The decision shows that even within this segregationist legal framework, courts could impose liability when the 'equal' prong was demonstrably violated. By upholding punitive damages against the company for its employee's malicious conduct and the company's subsequent ratification of it, the court emphasized the high duty of care owed by carriers to all passengers. The ruling serves as a precedent that segregation policies do not grant carriers immunity from liability for providing inferior services or for the abusive actions of their employees.
