Montgomery v. Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Co.

In my judgment, plaintiff’s instruction number three was prejudicially erroneous because the pronouncement thereof as to a possible finding by the jury in favor of the plaintiff was not grounded on the jury’s belief from the evidence — but merely on its belief. For this reason I would reverse the judgment, set aside the verdict, and award a new trial.

The instruction involved the proposition of excessive speed of the truck, and was specifically objected to on the ground that the evidence does not disclose that the rate of speed at which the truck was proceeding contributed in any manner to the…