Legal Opinion

Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Scott

Alabama Court of Appeals

Decided April 9, 1929No. 6 Div. 497Published

1Opinion of the CourtSamford, J.

The cause was tried on two counts, one charging subsequent negligence, and the other wanton negligence, and issué was joined on a plea in short by consent, as to each count, with leave to give in evidence any matter of defense, etc.

The first proposition in appellant’s brief is that the defendant should have been given the general charge as to the count claiming for subsequent negligence.

We recognize the rule so clearly stated in Young v. Woodward Iron Co., 216 Ala. 330, 113 So. 223, that “knowledge of peril, as an essential predicate for guilt of subsequent negligence,” is necessary, and that…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Central of Georgia Railway Co. v. FosheeSupreme Court of Alabama · 1899
  2. Alabama Great Southern Railroad v. McWhorterSupreme Court of Alabama · 1908
  3. L. & N. R. R. v. CalvertSupreme Court of Alabama · 1911
  4. Boyette v. BradleySupreme Court of Alabama · 1924
  5. Young v. Woodward Iron Co.Supreme Court of Alabama · 1927

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API