Vaughan v. McDaniel
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Ouachita Circuit Court; George W. Hays, Judge; statement by the court. .Made Vaughan, by his next friend, W. H. Vaughan, brought this action against the Freeman-Smith Lumber Company and O. S. McDaniel, one of its employees, to recover damages for an assault and battery alleged to have been committed upon him by McDaniel on the 27th day of August, 1906. The Freeman-Smith Lumber Company in its answer denied 'liability.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Ouachita Circuit Court; George W. Hays, Judge; statement by the court. .Made Vaughan, by his next friend, W. H. Vaughan, brought this action against the Freeman-Smith Lumber Company and O. S. McDaniel, one of its employees, to recover damages for an assault and battery alleged to have been committed upon him by McDaniel on the 27th day of August, 1906. The Freeman-Smith Lumber Company in its answer denied 'liability. McDaniel answered, and, after denying that he assaulted Vaughan in his capacity as agent or employee of -said Dumber Company, and that Vaughan suffered injuries to…
1Opinion of the Court
Hart, J.,
(after stating the facts.) No complaint is made of the instructions given by the court, and the sole question raised by the 'appeal is, was the evidence sufficient to sustain a verdict for appellee? In other words, was appellee justified in striking appellant under the evidence, when considered in the light most favorable to him? We think not. • The blow inflicted by him was not given in necessary self defense. He had not been assaulted by appellant.
In speaking of our statute in regard to assaults, in the case of Pratt v. State, 49 Ark. 179, the court said: “The intention and ability…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Anderson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1905
- Pratt v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1887
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1908
3Cited by1 opinion
- Guyer v. SmullenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1924