Missouri Pacific Railroad v. Yancey

Hart, C. J.,

(after stating the facts). The first assignment of error is that the testimony is not legally sufficient to warrant the verdict. A comparison of the testimony abstracted above with that proved upon the former trial will show that the testimony is at least as strong for the plaintiff as it was on the first trial of the ease. We there held that the testimony was legally sufficient to warrant the v.erdict, and this is the law of the case upon this appeal.

The next assignment of error is that the court erred in giving instruction No. 5, which reads as follows:

“The court instructs the…