Menz v. Nau

FUNK, PJ.

The parties will be referred to as they stood in the trial court.

Defendant complains of two claimed errors in the admission of evidence and seven in reference to instructions to the jury — being one as to the special request given before argument and six as to the general charge.

First it is contended that the court erred in the admission of the testimony of certain witnesses concerning marks observed in the pavement the next afternoon after the accident, which occurred about 11 o’clock the preceding night. ,

Under the whole record in this case,- and in view of the testimony of…