Karnopp v. Fort Smith Light & Traction Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from-Crawford Circuit Court; James Cochran, Judge; 1. Instruction 6 is abstract :and misleading, ignores all the admitted facts and makes the street car supreme in the street, protecting it almost absolutely from liability. 32 :So. 797; 44 Fla. 354; 14 Ky.
Read the full summary
Appeal from-Crawford Circuit Court; James Cochran, Judge; 1. Instruction 6 is abstract :and misleading, ignores all the admitted facts and makes the street car supreme in the street, protecting it almost absolutely from liability. 32 :So. 797; 44 Fla. 354; 14 Ky. Law Rep. 663; 99 Me. 149; 99 Mo. 509. 2. In instruction 10 the court in effect tells the jury that appellant had no right to be on the street; that the motoranan owed her no duty to see her, in the first place, and that even if he had seen her, still he would be justified in assuming that she would get out of the place of danger…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, J.
This action was 'brought by appellant to recover damages to compensate an injury received by her in a collision with one of appellee’s street cars. Appellant was 'chasing a young bird dog on the street to get it off the street and out of the danger of passing ears, and in doing so fell and the ear ran over her foot, necessitating its .amputation. There is a sharp conflict in the evidence as to the circumstances under which she was injured, the evidence on her part being to the effect that she fell .in front of the car and that the entire car ran over her foot; while that on the part of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pankey v. Little Rock Railway & Electric Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Little Rock Railway & Electric Co. v. SledgeSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1913
3Cited by2 opinions
- Yaffee v. Fort Smith Light & Traction Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- Pine Bluff Co. v. WebbSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1919