Louisville N. R. Co. v. Benton Mercantile Co.

ANDERSON, ,C. J.

The complaint charges that the injury to the mules was due to the “negligence or misconduct” of the defendant’s agents, servants or employés. While negligence and misconduct ar.e not necessarily synonymous terms, we think they were so used in the present complaint. At any rate, the complaint was not subject to any of the grounds of demurrer as argued by appellant’s counsel. This court has repeatedly held that negligence may be charged in general terms, and that the quo modo need not be set out. We see no reason why this rule should not also apply to misconduct, as it is no…