St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Holt

Supreme Court of Oklahoma

St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Holt

1911 OK 197, 115 P. 876, 28 Okla. 772, 1911 Okla. LEXIS 195

CourtSupreme Court of Oklahoma

DecidedMay 9, 1911

Docket821

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 1911 OK 197 (St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Holt) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Oklahoma primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

St. Louis S. F. R. Co. v. Holt, 1911 OK 197, 115 P. 876, 28 Okla. 772, 1911 Okla. LEXIS 195 (Okla. 1911).

Pincite

Opinion

WILLIAMS, J.

This action was first commenced in a justice of the peace court in LeFlore county on July 3, 1908. The defendant in error as plaintiff sued to recover damages from the plaintiff in error as defendant for its killing of his bay mare. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant prosecuted an appeal to the county court. The evidence on the part of the plaintiff tended to prove that the mare had been run down and killed by one of defendant’s trains. This evidence consisted of tracks on defendant’s road-bed for about 150 yards up to the point where the mare was found dead. From said point back to where the tracks began the track was straight. The evidence on the part of the defendant tended to prove the exercise of due care on its part. The court submitted the question of fact to the jury under proper instructions and a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff. There is no contention that it is excessive. This case in all respects is covered by St. Louis & San Francisco R. Co. v. Key (ante), decided at this term of court, 115 Pac. 875, *773 and authorities therein cited. The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

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

WILLIAMS, J.

This action was first commenced in a justice of the peace court in LeFlore county on July 3, 1908. The defendant in error as plaintiff sued to recover damages from the plaintiff in error as defendant for its killing of his bay mare. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant prosecuted an appeal to the county court. The evidence on the part of the plaintiff tended to prove that the mare had been run down and killed by one of defendant’s trains. This evidence consisted of tracks on defendant’s road-bed for about 150 yards up to the point where the mare was found dead. From said point back to where the tracks began the track was straight. The evidence on the part of the defendant tended to prove the exercise of due care on its part. The court submitted the question of fact to the jury under proper instructions and a verdict was rendered in favor of the plaintiff. There is no contention that it is excessive. This case in all respects is covered by St. Louis & San Francisco R. Co. v. Key (ante), decided at this term of court, 115 Pac. 875, *773 and authorities therein cited. The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

All the Justices concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

1911 OK 197, 115 P. 876, 28 Okla. 772, 1911 Okla. LEXIS 195, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/st-louis-s-f-r-co-v-holt-okla-1911.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack