Brigham v. Dardanelle & Russellville Railway Co.
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pope Circuit Court; Hugh Basham, Judge; The question of the negligence of the engineer should have been submitted to a jury. 98 Ark. 178; 91 Id. 337; 38 Cyc. 1567, 1578. This case is settled by 98 Ark. 178. There was legal evidence of negligence on the part of the engineer. There was nothing to submit to a jury, and the court properly directed a verdict.
1Opinion of the CourtKirby, J.
The appeal herein comes from a directed verdict. It is the second appeal of this case, which is sufficiently stated in the opinion on the first appeal in 98 Ark. 178.
Upon the trial anew, the court directed a verdict in favor of appellee, and its action is complained of as error by appellant.
In deciding the question, whether there is sufficient testimony to support a verdict in favor of the party against whom the court directed one, the rule is that that view of the testimony most favorable to the losing party shall be accepted and the testimony in his favor given its strongest probative…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Catlett v. Railway Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1893
- Williams v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1912
3Cited by8 opinions
- Baratti v. Koser Gin CompanySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Elkins v. Henry Vogt Machine Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- A. S. Barboro Company v. JamesSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1943
- McCollum v. GraberSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1944
- Kellogg-Fontaine Lumber Co. v. CronicSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1951
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.