Pruitt

This appeal, originally before the district court of appeal for the second appellate district, resulted in a judgment affirming the order of the superior court granting the plaintiff a new trial after verdict and judgment against him.

A petition for rehearing in this court was thereafter granted. The opinion of the district court of appeal, written by the late Justice Taggart, is as follows:—

This decision of the district court reaches what we deem to be the proper construction to be given to sections 483 and 484 of the Civil Code. In its opinion the district court refers only to the cases of Mitchell v. Southern Pacific Railroad Co., 87 Cal. 62 , [11 L. R. A. 130, 25 Pac. 245 ], and the case of Buell v. New York Central R. R. Co., 31 N. Y. 319 , [ 88 Am. Dec. 271 ], cited therein, and Thomas v. San Pedro etc. Co. 170 Fed. 129 , [ 95 C. C. A. 371 ], in support of its conclusion, and it is earnestly insisted by appellant that the Mitchell case (which he claims should control the question in this state) not only does not sustain the contention of the district court of appeal, but on the contrary is opposed to it, as is the weight of authority elsewhere. In the case here at bar the…

I dissent. Section 484 of the Civil Code reads as follows: “Every railroad corporation must have printed and conspicuously posted on the inside of its passenger-cars its rules and regulations regarding fare and conduct of its passengers; and in case any passenger is injured on or from the platform of a car, or on any baggage, wood, gravel, or freight car, in violation of such printed regulations, or in violation of positive verbal instructions or injunctions given to such passenger in person by any officer of Pie train, the corporation is not responsible for damages for such injuries, unless the corporation failed to comply with the provisions of the preceding section.” It is then a positive ■ law of this state, to which we are bound to give effect, that in case any passenger is injured on or from the platform of a car in violation of the printed and conspicuously posted regulations of the company, the company is not responsible in damages for such injury. It is admitted that among the printed and conspicuously posted regulations of this company was the following: “Notice to passengers. (1st) Passengers are not allowed to ride on the engine, or on the baggage, mail or express…