Legal Opinion · Dissent

Shipp v. Missouri Pacific Transportation Co.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided November 28, 1938No. 4-5266Published

1Dissent

DüNham, J.

(dissenting). The majority has held that the traffic prdinance of the city of North Little Rock introduced in evidence does not differ materially from the state traffic statute. With this holding, I am in accord.

The majority has further held that instructions Nos. 9 and 9%, given at the request of appellee, are correct instructions. To this holding, I cannot agree.

The court in said instruction No. 9^ told the jury: “So in this, case if you find that the automobile of the plaintiff and the bus of the defendant were approaching each other on the same street or highway, going in…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Mays v. Ritchie Grocer CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
  2. Herring v. BollingerSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1930
  3. Pollock v. HammSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1928
  4. Hammond v. HambySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1935
  5. White Co. v. J. E. Thompson Motor Express Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1930

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API