p. 733Susan Mullin, Respondent, v. The Long Island Railroad Company, Appellant.Headnote
Railroad — rule that uncanceled ticket must be presented—offer of ticket canceled by mistake.The rule of a railroad requiring the presentation of an uncanceled ticket as evidence of a right to transportation is reasonable.
A passenger who, knowing that a conductor had canceled her return ticket by mistake, offers it to another conductor on the return trip and is required to leave the train in default of paying fare cannot recover from the railroad.
Appeal by the defendant, The Long Island Bailroad Company, from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, borough of Queens, in favor of the plaintiff, rendered on the 8th day of October, 1909.
Dominic B. Griffin, for the appellant.
Gordon Ireland, for the respondent.
The plaintiff had purchased for herself and her sister two excursion tickets. The outgoing conductor by mistake punched, and thereby apparently canceled, the return tickets. The holders thereof attempted their return on a train in charge of another conductor, and upon tendering only the canceled tickets as evidence of the right to ride, were told that in default of paying the fare they must leave the train, which they did at an intermediate station, where they were detained for a short time and resumed their journey on another
p. 734train. The rule requiring an uncanceled ticket as evidence of; purchased. transportation is reasonable. It was the duty of the con-ductor to enforce this rule; the plaintiff knew that the wrong tickets had been canceled; the wrong done to her was by tine conductor of" the first train; he, acting for the company, had s© mutilated as to destroy evidence of her right to return in a later train. Yet she presents and demands recognition of' the ticket, knowing that the conductor had no power to accfept her statement and, by condoning what another erroneously had done, rehabilitate- her ticket. One citation is sufficient
(Monnier v.
N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co., 175 N. Y. 281 ), but also may be considered
Wiggins v.
King ( 91 Hun, 340 );
Townsend v.
N. Y. C. & H. R. R. R. Co. (
56 N. Y. 295 ).
The judgment should be reversed and a new trial ordered, costs to abide the event;
Hirschberg, P. J., Woodward, Rich and Carr, JJ., córicurred.
Judgment of the Municipal Court reversed and new trial ordered, costs to abide the event. ;