Farmer v. Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co.

Mississippi Supreme Court

Farmer v. Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co.

86 Miss. 55

CourtMississippi Supreme Court

DecidedApril 15, 1905

StatusPublished

Cited by8 cases

This text of 86 Miss. 55 (Farmer v. Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Farmer v. Cumberland Telephone & Telegraph Co., 86 Miss. 55 (Mich. 1905).

Pincite

Opinion

Truly, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This appeal challenges the correctness of the action of the trial judge in granting a peremptory instruction in favor of appellee at the conclusion of appellant’s testimony. The rule in such case was recently stated by this court as follows: “It is well settled in our state that, where a peremptory instruction is given, the losing party is entitled, upon the review of the action of the court, to have all facts in his favor considered as true. A peremptory instruction is proper only in cases where, with all the facts in evidence taken as true, with every inference from them, they fail to maintain the issue.” McCaughn v. Young, 85 Miss., 277 (s.c., 37 South. Rep., 839). Tested by that rule, the instant case should have been submitted to the jury. If the testimony of the witnesses Patton and Henson as to the vicious and dangerous disposition of the animal and the knowledge of this fact by the manager of the telephone company be true, and if the testimony of the appellant that he was ignorant of this be likewise true, then this evidence was sufficient to sustain a verdict in favor of appellant. The facts being sworn to positively, the jury should have been permitted to pass upon both the credibility of the witnesses and the probability and reasonableness of their story.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Truly, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This appeal challenges the correctness of the action of the trial judge in granting a peremptory instruction in favor of appellee at the conclusion of appellant’s testimony. The rule in such case was recently stated by this court as follows: “It is well settled in our state that, where a peremptory instruction is given, the losing party is entitled, upon the review of the action of the court, to have all facts in his favor considered as true. A peremptory instruction is proper only in cases where, with all the facts in evidence taken as true, with every inference from them, they fail to maintain the issue.” McCaughn v. Young, 85 Miss., 277 (s.c., 37 South. Rep., 839). Tested by that rule, the instant case should have been submitted to the jury. If the testimony of the witnesses Patton and Henson as to the vicious and dangerous disposition of the animal and the knowledge of this fact by the manager of the telephone company be true, and if the testimony of the appellant that he was ignorant of this be likewise true, then this evidence was sufficient to sustain a verdict in favor of appellant. The facts being sworn to positively, the jury should have been permitted to pass upon both the credibility of the witnesses and the probability and reasonableness of their story.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

86 Miss. 55, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farmer-v-cumberland-telephone-telegraph-co-miss-1905.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack