Seaboard Air-Line Railway v. Walthour
This text of 43 S.E. 720 (Seaboard Air-Line Railway v. Walthour) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinions
While the law raises against a railway company a presumption of negligence whenever the fact is made to appear that live stock was killed by the running of its cars, yet this presumption can not withstand positive evidence that the company’s employees exercised ordinary diligence, both as regards maintaining a lookout for stock, and endeavoring to avoid injury to the same when discovered. South Carolina R. Co. v. Powell, 108 Ga. 437; Georgia Southern Ry. Co. v. Sanders, 111 Ga. 128. Eelevant testimony in behalf of the company on the part of its servants can not, if they be unimpeached, arbitrarily be disregarded by court or jury, upon the assumption that it is not, in point of fact, in accord with the truth. Georgia Southern Ry. Co. v. Thompson, 111 Ga. 731; Georgia & Alabama Ry. Co. v. Cook, 114 Ga. 760, 762. So it necessarily follows that where, as in the [428]*428present case, a plaintiff relies for a recovery wholly upon the presumption of law arising in such cases, and this presumption is rebutted by uncontradicted evidence introduced by the defendant company, to the effect that its servants-were without fault, a verdict in favor of the plaintiff can not properly be allowed to stand. Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Wood, 105 Ga. 499.
Judgment reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
43 S.E. 720, 117 Ga. 427, 1903 Ga. LEXIS 252, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/seaboard-air-line-railway-v-walthour-ga-1903.