Mack v. T. & P. Ry. Co.

The defendant appeals from a judgment awarding plaintiff damages for the value of an animal killed by one of the trains operated by defendant, and it is urged that the judgment is erroneous in that the evidence establishes the animal came upon the track in such close proximity to the train it was impossible for the engineer to avoid the accident.

The law placed upon the defendant the burden of proving that it was not at fault (Act No. 70 of 1886; State vs. Foster, 106 La. 425, 31 So. 57; White vs. V. S. & P. R. R. Co., 2 La. App. 88; Nelms vs. L. R. & N. Ry. Co., 3 La. App. 428); and although…