Hartzell v. Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co.

Appellant, .who was a drayman, sought to recover damages for injuries to his horse, suffered by reason of appellee’s negligence. The trial court rendered judgment upon the special verdict in favor of appellee. The correctness of this action is here questioned. Whether or not the verdict sufficiently establishes appellant’s freedom from contributory negligence, is wha.t we are called upon to determine. Prom the verdict, we learn that on and prior to June '20, 1893, appellant was engaged in the business of draying at Bloomfield, Indiana; that on this day “his horse was standing hitched to the…