Sikes v. Thomas

Appellant, Miss Sarah Alice Sikes, contends that this case should be reversed (1) because the jury verdict for defendants was against the great weight of the evidence, and (2) because of the granting by the lower court to defendants of certain designated instructions.

The only erroneous instruction was the faísus in uno, falsus in omnibus instruction, which was condemned in Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. v. Wright, 190 Miss. 53, 199 So. 289. And while it is error to grant this instruction, we have followed the rule that it is not reversible error in a case where no jury, composed of fair,…