Gulf M. & N. R. v. Dossett

79 So. 179, 118 Miss. 327
Mississippi Supreme Court·Decided March 15, 1918·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Two of us are of the opinion that the court below committed no error in granting the peremptory instruction requested" by appellee, and therefore that its judgment should be affirmed. One of us is of the opinion that the court below committed no error in refusing the peremptory instruction requested by appellant, but that the peremptory instruction requested by appellee should have been refused, and the question of liability submitted to the jury. Three of us are "of the opinion that the court below erred in refusing appellant’s request for a peremptory instruction, and for that reason it also erred in granting the peremptory instruction requested by appellee. Four of us, therefore, are of the opinion that appellee’s request for a peremptory instruction should, have been refused.

Consequently, the judgment of the court below will be reversed, and the cause remanded.

Reversed, and remanded.

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

Gulf M. & N. R. v. Dossett, 79 So. 179, 118 Miss. 327 (Mich. 1918).

79 So. 179 (Gulf M. & N. R. v. Dossett) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Le Duc
300 P. 919 (Montana Supreme Court, 1931)