Lusk v. Skelton

Tliis action was commenced by the .defendant in error, plaintiff below, against the plaintiffs in error, defendants below, to recover damages for a hog belonging to plaintiff tilled by one of defendant’s trains. There was a verdict and judgment for plaintiff below. The only assignments urged raise the question of the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. We have carefully examined the evidence, and do not believe that the same reasonably tends to support the verdict and judgment. There was no proof of any circumstances requiring the railway company to construct a hog-proof fence…