Railway Express Agency Inc. v. Standridge

1. The evidence did not demand a finding as a matter of law, as contended by the plaintiffs- in error, that the collision of the truck of the defendant express company with the automobile of the plaintiff, in which the plaintiff sustained certain injuries, was unavoidable by reason of the fact that the end of the tie-rod, a part of the steering apparatus of the truck, suddenly broke because of a microscopic defect of which the defendants did not know and could not have known by the exercise of ordinary “care, but there was evidence which would authorize a finding that the collision was due to…