Carroll v. Charleston & Seashore R. R.
Supreme Court of South Carolina
Before Gage, J., Orangeburg, May, 1902. Action by Annie B. Carroll against Charleston and Seashore Railroad Co. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. cite: Judge should declare what is negligence: 41 S. C., 140. Court of appeals will grant relief from orders for new trials nisi where they ■ do not meet the demands of the case: 18 Ency P. & P., 144'; 2 Cliff., 82. cite: Party cannot complain of charge too favorable to him: 5,0 S. C., 49; 62 S. C., 380; 63 S. C.,…
Read the full summary
Before Gage, J., Orangeburg, May, 1902. Action by Annie B. Carroll against Charleston and Seashore Railroad Co. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. cite: Judge should declare what is negligence: 41 S. C., 140. Court of appeals will grant relief from orders for new trials nisi where they ■ do not meet the demands of the case: 18 Ency P. & P., 144'; 2 Cliff., 82. cite: Party cannot complain of charge too favorable to him: 5,0 S. C., 49; 62 S. C., 380; 63 S. C., 290. What facts make negligence is for jury: 61 S. C., 563; 30 S. C., 218. Whole charge must be considered: 47 S. C., 67;…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Mr. Chief Justice Pope.
The action was for damages. At the trial at Orangeburg, at May term of Court, 1902, the verdict of the jury was in favor of plaintiff.' On motion of defendant, the Circuit Judge required the plaintiff to remit $3,000 of her verdict. This .was done. Defendant then appealed to this Court on four grounds. These grounds virtually raise two questions. The questions are: Was the Circuit Judge in error in his charge to the jury? Did the Circuit Judge err in only granting a new tria nisi? Before going into an examination of these…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Stuckey v. Atlantic Coast Line R. R.Supreme Court of South Carolina · 1900