Purcell v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.

Ladd, C. J. —

1 2 *6713 *668The facts are substantially as related in the opinion on the former appeal, though the fireman did not testify, and the engineer was examined at greater length. See Purcell v. Railway Co., 109 Iowa, 628. There was nothing to show that the fireman was looking ahead previous to the collision, or that he had seen the deceased before being struck, and the special finding that he knew “-Hunt was on the bridge in time to give warning and have the engine stopped before injuring him” was without support in the evidence. As the finding was not essential to a verdict for plaintiff,…