Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Christian

Alabama Court of Appeals

Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Christian

168 So. 466, 163 So. 466, 26 Ala. App. 555, 1935 Ala. App. LEXIS 181

CourtAlabama Court of Appeals

DecidedOctober 8, 1935

Docket2 Div. 565.

StatusPublished

This text of 168 So. 466 (Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Christian) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Alabama Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Christian, 168 So. 466, 163 So. 466, 26 Ala. App. 555, 1935 Ala. App. LEXIS 181 (Ala. Ct. App. 1935).

Pincite

Opinion

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

Appellee brought suit against appellant for the alleged negligent killing of a mule, the property of appellee, on or about the 9th day of November, 1933, in Sumter county, Ala.

The evidence, without dispute or conflict, disclosed that the mule in question was found dead near the tracks of appellant on the morning of the 10th day of November, 1933, in the town of Cuba; and the testimony is likewise without dispute or conflict, to the effect that said mule was killed by the fast moving train of appellant at the time and place mentioned. Under the evidence, therefore, the appellant was under the burden to show that there was no negligence on the part of the railroad company, or its agents, in this connection.

We have read and carefully considered the evidence in this case and are clear to the conclusion that a jury question was presented. The trial court, therefore, committed no error in refusing the general affirmative charge to defendant; nor in overruling its motion for a new trial.

The judgment of the lower court from which this appeal was taken will stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BRICKEN, Presiding Judge.

Appellee brought suit against appellant for the alleged negligent killing of a mule, the property of appellee, on or about the 9th day of November, 1933, in Sumter county, Ala.

The evidence, without dispute or conflict, disclosed that the mule in question was found dead near the tracks of appellant on the morning of the 10th day of November, 1933, in the town of Cuba; and the testimony is likewise without dispute or conflict, to the effect that said mule was killed by the fast moving train of appellant at the time and place mentioned. Under the evidence, therefore, the appellant was under the burden to show that there was no negligence on the part of the railroad company, or its agents, in this connection.

We have read and carefully considered the evidence in this case and are clear to the conclusion that a jury question was presented. The trial court, therefore, committed no error in refusing the general affirmative charge to defendant; nor in overruling its motion for a new trial.

The judgment of the lower court from which this appeal was taken will stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 So. 466, 163 So. 466, 26 Ala. App. 555, 1935 Ala. App. LEXIS 181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alabama-great-southern-r-co-v-christian-alactapp-1935.