Gaskill v. Schaeffer

The errors asserted are general and test the weight of the evidence, and the law of the case as relates to the charge of the court.

It is urged that the court in the general charge erred in failing to define with more particularity the meaning of “within the assured clear distance ahead,” as found in §12603 GO. This claim is not tenable. The charge followed the language of the statute. No request was made for more specific instructions. The exceptions noted to the charge were general. This roaches errors of commission only. There was no error in the charge as given. If the language of the…