Johnson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co.
This text of 155 P. 971 (Johnson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Ry. Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Montana Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
On May 10, 1913, a milch cow belonging to the respondent was struck and killed by one of the appellant’s trains, and the respondent brought this action to recover $85, the value of said cow. The complaint alleges negligence in the killing, and while the answer amounts to a general denial, negligence was the only issue developed at the trial. As evidence of such negligence,
Appellant’s contention is that, having presented testimony tending to exonerate it from negligence, the presumption was overcome in the absence of a further showing by the respondent, and a verdict should have been directed accordingly. This is untenable. "When a presumption of this character is confronted with testimony in the opposite direction, the result is a conflict of evidence which the jury must resolve. (Rev. Codes, sec. 8028, subd. 2; Freeman v. Chicago, M. & St. P. Ry. Co., 52 Mont. 1, 154 Pac. 912; Emerson v. Butte Electric Ry. Co., 46 Mont. 454, 129 Pac. 319.)
The judgment and order appealed from are affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
155 P. 971, 52 Mont. 73, 1916 Mont. LEXIS 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-chicago-milwaukee-st-paul-ry-co-mont-1916.