Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Bryant

15 S.E. 537, 89 Ga. 457
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided June 17, 1892·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

[457] Judgment reversed.

The testimony for the defendant tended to show that the killing of the mules was an unavoidable accident. The grounds for nonsuit were, that as to the bay mule the case should be dismissed because it appeared not to be the plaintiff’s property; and that the testimony failed to show that the mules had been killed by the defendant’s cars. The grounds for new trial, in addition to those alleging that the verdict is contrary to law and evidence, are: The court refused to permit the engineer to answer the question, “What could you have done with the appliances at hand on the engine, after discovering the mules, that would have prevented the striking of them ? ” The court charged the jury, that if the plaintiff' swapped a colt belonging to his wife for one of the mules alleged to have been killed by the defendant’s train, and paid $25 in addition, he would be entitled in this suit to recover his interest in the mule, if under the evidence and law he is entitled to recover at all. Dessau & Bartlett and R. V. Hardeman, for plaintiff in error. No appearance contra.

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

Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Bryant, 15 S.E. 537, 89 Ga. 457 (Ga. 1892).

15 S.E. 537 (Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Bryant) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pope v. Seaboard Air-Line Railway
94 S.E. 311 (Court of Appeals of Georgia, 1917)
Sims v. Western & Atlantic Railroad
35 S.E. 696 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1900)