Southern Railway Co. v. Puryear

56 S.E. 73, 127 Ga. 88, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 744
Supreme Court of Georgia·Decided December 12, 1906·Published

Opinion

Bumpkin, J.

1. Whether or not a train slackened speed a.t a given point where stock was injured, and, if so, to what extent, being in conflict, evidence that it was behind time was admissible to show that there was a reason or motive for not stopping, or for making rapid speed. Killian v. Georgia R. Co., 97 Ga. 727.

Submitted July 18, Decided December 12, 1906.- Action for damages. Before Judge Fite. Whitfield superior •court. November 17, 1905. Shumate & Maddox, for plaintiff in error. George G. Glenn and M. G. Tarver, contra.

:2. There being some eoniliet in the evidence on material points, and enough evidence to authorize the verdict, there was no error in refusing to grant a new trial, although the evidence of the agents on defendant’s engine which killed the plaintiff’s mules, if taken alone, may have made out a complete defense. Judgment affirmed.

All the Jvistices concur.

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

Southern Railway Co. v. Puryear, 56 S.E. 73, 127 Ga. 88, 1906 Ga. LEXIS 744 (Ga. 1906).

56 S.E. 73 (Southern Railway Co. v. Puryear) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Killian v. Georgia Railroad & Banking Co.
25 S.E. 384 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1896)