Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Windham

Supreme Court of Alabama

Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Windham

120 Ala. 231

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Windham. Read the opinion of the Court — 126 Ala. 552 →

Supreme Court of Alabama·Decided November 15, 1897·Published

Opinion

McCLELLAN, J.

The evidence in this cause makes no case for exemplary or vindictive damages. Charge 1 requested by the defendant should, therefore, have been given. We can not know that exemplary damages were not assessed by the jury, and hence we can not say the refusal of the charge. involved no injury to the defendant.

Charge 5 given for plaintiff should have further hypothesized damages to the plaintiff.

We find no error in the other rulings of the court to' which exceptions were reserved.

Reversed and remanded.

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

McCLELLAN, J.

The evidence in this cause makes no case for exemplary or vindictive damages. Charge 1 requested by the defendant should, therefore, have been given. We can not know that exemplary damages were not assessed by the jury, and hence we can not say the refusal of the charge. involved no injury to the defendant.

Charge 5 given for plaintiff should have further hypothesized damages to the plaintiff.

We find no error in the other rulings of the court to' which exceptions were reserved.

Reversed and remanded.

Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Windham, 120 Ala. 231 (Ala. 1897).

Pincite

120 Ala. 231 (Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. Windham) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.