Little Rock Railway & Electric Co. v. Doyle
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Echvard W. Winfield, Judge; r. Instruction No. 3 given at plaintiff’s request was erroneous. There is no evidence that the speed of the car was suddenly increased.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Echvard W. Winfield, Judge; r. Instruction No. 3 given at plaintiff’s request was erroneous. There is no evidence that the speed of the car was suddenly increased. The motorman’s testimony shows that, after he cut off the current, it was not reapplied until after the car was brought to a stop at Nineteenth Street, and this is uncontradicted. 37 Ark. 598. It is also objectionable because it did not submit to the jury the question of fact whether the jerk, if any, was the proximate cause of the injury. 87 N. Y. Supp. 523; 171 N. Y. 309; 6 Mackey, 57; 73 Pac.…
1Opinion of the Court
Battle. J.
T. N. Doyle brought this action against the Little Rock Railway & Electric Company. He alleged in his complaint “that on the 5th day of June, 1903, the defendant injured him through the carelessness and negligence of its employees operating a car. That plaintiff was a passenger on a South Main car, and when the car was neg.r Eighteenth and Main he motioned the conductor to stop for him to get off; and the conductor obeyed and slowed the car as plaintiff was advancing to the rear end, and continued to slacken its speed until he reached the step on the rear platform. That while he was…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Indianapolis & St. Louis Railroad v. HorstSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
3Cited by2 opinions
- Robinson v. Little Rock Railway & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1914
- Yellow Rose Mining Co. v. StraitSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918