Cleveland, C., C. & St. L. Ry. Co. v. Moss

Appellant, at the close of appellee’s testimony, and also after all the evidence was in, moved the court to instruct the jury to find for defendant. The court refused the motion. In this there was no error.

A case was presented that required the findings of a jury.

It is urged as error that appellee was allowed to prove the cautious habits and character of the deceased. When appellee closed his case, it did not appear that there was any eye-witness to the accident.

It was not, then, error to receive evidence of his habits as to being cautious and prudent. In the absence-of direct proof, ordinary…