Bates v. Louisville N. R. Co.
Opinions
It is insisted on the part of appellee that this court cannot consider the action of the trial court in giving the general charge as to count B, for the reason that a diagram of the locus in quo was drawn on a black board and used on the trial, and that this diagram is not copied in the bill of exceptions. Much of the testimony of the witnesses was based upon this diagram, without which their testimony is meaningless, and for this reason we cannot review rulings of the trial court in giving the general charge as to count B. Ala. Term. R. R. v. Benns,
Charge 4, given at the request of defendant, is in effect the same as charge E held to be good in Williams v. Anniston E.
G. Co.,
As we have seen, this court must assume that there was sufficient evidence to warrant the giving of the general charge as to the wanton count. That being so, and charge 5 asserting a correct proposition of law as applied to the count charging simple negligence, the giving of this charge at the request of defendant does not constitute error.
There being no error in the record, the judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Judgment affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
106 So. 394 (Bates v. Louisville N. R. Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.