Imágenes de páginas

*In an action against a street railroad com- resentatives are not parties.—Dyer v. Jacoway
pany for injuries to plaintiff in a collision with (Ark.) 901.
his vehicle, held. that the question of plaintiff's

Creditors, seeking subrogation to sureties
contributory negligence was one for the jury.

rights under indemnity mortgage, held guilty of
Rapp v. St. Louis Transit Co. (Mo. Sup.) 865.

laches.--Dyer v. Jacoway (Ark.) 901.
In an action against a street railroad for in-

*An indorser on notes who has paid only a
juries to plaintiff in a collision with his vehicle, portion of them cannot claim by subrogation
certain instructions held to have correctly pre: the right to participate in the securities held
sented the issues.-Rapp v. St. Louis Trausit for the payment of the debt.-Bank of Fay.
Co. (Mo. Sup.) 865.

etteville v. Lorwein (Ark.) 919.
It is the duty of a person crossing railway
tracks to look and listen until he is safely

across, and it is not sufficient merely to look
before going on the track.-Ross v. Metropol- See "Action."
itan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 144.
It is not the duty of a motorman operating

a street car to stop merely because he observes
a pedestrian approaching the track, but he is See “Process.”
only required to stop when something in the
conduct of the pedestrian indicates that he is

unaware of the presence of the car and apt to
be struck by it. -Ross v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Liquor sales on Sunday, see "Intoxicating
Co. (Alo. App.) 144.

Liquors," 88 3, 4.
In an action against a street railroad company
for injuries to a pedestrian, who was struck
by a car, evidence held to show plaintiff guilty

of contributory negligence.- Ross v. Metropol- See “Courts," $8 1, 4.
itan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 144.

In an action against a street railroad company
for injuries to a pedestrian who was struck

by a car, evidence held to justify submission
to the jury of the question whether defendant's See “Principal and Surety."
motorman observed plaintiff's danger in time
to have avoided the injury.-Ross v. Metropol-

itan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 144.

Question of contributory negligence of plain- | In pleading, see "Pleading," $ 1.
tiff in action against a street railroad held to be
for the jury.-Waechter v. St. Louis & M, R.

R. Co. (Mo. App.) 147.

Woman, who was struck by a street car, See “Public Lands,” $ 1.
which she would have seen, had she looked, held
guilty of contributory negligence.—Waddell v.

Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.
Negligence of a pedestrian in failing to dis- See "False Pretenses."

an approaching street car held super-
seded as proximate cause by negligence of the

motorman, who failed to prevent the injury
when it was possible to do so.-Waddell v. Payment of taxes to sustain adverse possession,
Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.

see “Adverse Possession," $ 1.
In an action against a street railroad for in- Power of county to contract for expenses of
juries to a pedestrian, testimony that the mo- publication of potice nonresident de-
torman would have been mobbed held erroneous linquent taxpayers, see "Counties," 8 2.
and prejudicial to defendant.-- Waddell v. Met-
ropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.

Local or special taxes.
In an action against a street railroad for in- See “Highways," $ 2; "Municipal Corpora-
juries to a pedestrian, evidence held to raise

tions," $ 9.
an issue of fact as to whether the motorman Assessments for municipal, improvements, see
could have stopped the car after discovering "Municipal Corporations," $ 5.
plaintiff's peril. --Waddell v. Metropolitan St.
Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 76.).

Occupation or privilege taxes.
In an action for injuries, where plaintiff char. See "Intoxicating Liquors," $ 2.
ged negligence in defendant's permitting its Foreign corporation, see "Corporations," $ 6.
rails to be charged with electricity, causing his
horse to fall, etc., an instruction held erroneous 8 1. Sale of land for nonpayment of
not presenting the issues involved.--San

Antonio Traction Co. y. Yost (Tex. Civ. App.) The fact that taxes had been paid by defend-

ant or his grantors, and that a forfeiture of the

land and sale for taxes was void. did not estop

defendant from acquiring the void tax title and

setting up adverse possession thereunder.-Car-
See “Highways”; “Municipal Corporations,” penter v. Smith (Ark.) 976.
88 7, 8.

The personal property received by an assignee
Dedication, see “Dedication," $$ 1, 2.

for the benefit of creditors is subject to the un-

paid taxes on the assignor's real and personal

property before the real estate can be subjected

thereto.-Phoenix Brewing Co.'s Assignee v.
Creditors cannot procure subrogation to de: Central Consumers' Co. (Ky.) 1051.
ceased surety's rights in indemnity mortgage in Petition in an action seeking to enjoin the
a proceeding to which the surety's heirs or rep- ) sale of property bid in by the state for delin-

* Point annotated. See syllabus.




quent taxes held fatally defective.-Alexander | Parol or extrinsic evidence of telegram, see
V. Aud (Ky.) 1103.

“Evidence," § 8.
Under Ky. St. 1903, 88 3760, 4030, an al., 1. Regulation and operation.
legation that the tax collector has certified

Kirby's Dig. $ 7946, prescribing a penalty
certain facts gives rise to the presumption for telegraph company's failure to transmit a
that the acts certified to have been performed, message, when construed with sections 7943 and
as well as all other acts required to be done | 7944, and Mansf. Dig. & 6419, applies only to
to support them.-Alexander v. Aud (Ky.) a willful or intentional refusal to transmit a

message. -State v. Western Union Telegraph
Under Ky. St. 1903, § 4036, plaintiffs, in Co. (Ark.) 834.
a suit to enjoin the sale of land which had In an action for failure to deliver a telegram
been bid in by the state for delinquent taxes, ordering potatoes from the addressee, held proper
must tender the unpaid taxes.—Alexander v. to permit him to testify that, if he had received
Aud (Ky.) 1103.

the message, he would have complied with the
Under Civ. Code Prac. $ 25, all the tax- order.-Elam y. Western Union Telegraph Co.
payers of a county held not entitled to join (Mo. App.) 115.
in a suit to enjoin on various grounds the A telegraph company, on receiving a tele-
sale of lands bid in by the state for delinquent gram for persons residing 342 miles from the
taxes.-Alexander v. Aud (Ky.) 1103.

destination station, after hours when it had
Under Const. § 171, and Ky. St. 1903, 88 messengers available, held not guilty of negli-
4019, 4021, 4143, failure of sheriff to levý gence in failing to deliver until succeeding day.
upon a landowner's personalty to collect taxes

-McCaul V. Western Union Telegraph Co.
assessed against the land held not to render (Tenn.) 325.
a sale of land for taxes invalid. - Alexander
V. Aud (Ky.) 1103.

*Under Gen. Laws 1897, p. 138, c. 103, $ 15,
a citation or notice in a tax suiť by the state Homestead rights of tenant in common, see
against a nonresident landowner, not comply-

Homestead," § 1.
ing with the form prescribed, held insufficients 1. Mutual rights, duties, and liabili-
to support a judgment. -Garvey v. State (Tex.

ties of co-tenants.
Civ. App.) 873.

A co-tenant cannot, by buying in an outstand-
$ 2. Tax titles.

ing incumbrance, acquire title as against his
Tax deeds held not sufficiently certain in their co-tenants. · Mahoney V. Nevins (Mo. Sup.)
descriptions and consequently void.—Covington 731.
v. Berry (Ark.) 1005.

§ 2. Rights and liabilities of co-ten-
Under section 3, p. 97, Acts 1866–67, ex-

ants as to third persons.
empting Real Estate Bank lands from taxation, Where a co-tenant buys in an incumbrance,
listing of such lands for taxation held evi- the other co-tenants are bound to contribute
dence of the sale by the bank's receiver. - their respective proportions of the considera-
Cracraft v. Meyer (Ark.) 1027.

tion paid.-Mahoney y. Nevins (Mo. Sup.) 731.
Under the act of 1867 exempting lands of the
Real Estate Bank from taxation, certain re-
ceivership proceedings held to constitute evi-

dence of a sale of certain lands belonging to of property on rescission of sale, see “Sales,”
the bank.-Cracraft v. Meyer (Ark.) 1027.

$ 3.
Under Rev. St. 1837, c. 128, 88 133, 134, Acts Sufficiency of complaint to show tender of goods
July 15, 1868 (Laws 1868, p. 62, § 1), and to agent, see “Carriers," 8 1.
Kirby's Dig. $4807, a land commissioner's
deed to land forfeited for unpaid taxes is prima
facie evidence of the taking of the steps neces-

sary for the transmission of title.-Cracraft or leases, see “Landlord and Tenant,” $ 2.
v. Meyer (Ark.) 1027.

Failure to record a deed to certain land be-
longing to the state held not to overcome the

presumption of sale which arises from the is-
suance of a subsequent tax deed by the State See "Wills."
Land Commissioner.--Cracraft v. Meyer (Ark.)

§ 3. Legacy, inheritance, and transfer

Creation, see "Wills," $ 3.
Under Shannon's Code, $8 724, 735, one-half
of personal property belonging to a nonresident

decedent, which his widow elected to take in
kind under his will, held not subject to collat.

See “Larceny."
eral inheritance taxation.-Memphis Trust Co.
v. Speed (Tenn.) 321.

An executor of a nonresident, owning prope
erty in Tennessee which passed to collateral Effect on admissibility of confessions,
legatees, held not entitled to deduct from the "Criminal Law," 8 12.
amount subject to collateral inheritance tax Evidence of threats by defendant in prosecution
Tennessee debts not shown to have been paid for homicide, see "Homicide," 8 7.
from such assets.-Memphis Trust Co. v. Speed Instructions as to threats by deceased against
(Tenn.) 32

accused in trial for homicide, see "Homicide,"

$ 10.

Municipal regulations, see "Municipal Corpora-
tions," 8 6.

For carriage of passengers, see "Carriers,” $ 4.
• Point annotated. See syllabus.



See “Logs and Logging."

Of record for purpose of review, see "Criml-
In piles for use in building fence as fixture,

nal Law," 8 24.
see "Fixtures."
Removal of as trespass, see "Trespass," $ 1.


See “Taxation," $ 3.
For filing bill of exceptions, see "Exceptions,

Bill of," $ 2.
For giving indemnity bond in action on lost in Action for wrongful death, see "Death," $ 1.

strument, see "Lost Instruments.
For motion to quash deposition, see "Deposi-

For payment of interest, see "Interest,” & 2. Where complainant based his claim upon the
For performance of contract, "Con- provisions of a treaty, it was not necessary to
tracts," 8 1.

make a formal claim of his rights under the
For rescission of sale, see “Sales," $ 3.

treaty.--Ehrlich v. Weber (Tenn.) 188.
For taking appeal or suing out writ of error,

see "Appeal and Error," 8 3.
Of taking effect of deed, see "Deeds," $ 1.


See "Logs and Logging."

Color of title, see “Adverse Possession."
Covenants of title, see “Covenants," 8 1. Evidence of former judgment, see "Judgment,"
Removal of cloud, see “Quieting Title."

Tax titles, see "Taxation," $ 2.

Injuries to trespassers, see "Negligence," § 1;

“Railroads," 89 5, 7.
Particular matters affecting title.

To the person, see “Assault and Battery," § 1.
See “Dedication," $ 2; "Partition," $ 1. 8 1. Actions.

In an action for trespass on lands, evidence
Particular species of property or rights.

considered, and held insufficient to show that

plaintiff had paid taxes on the lands in three
See "Public Lands," $ 1.

payments before the date of the trespass, and
Stock of corporation, see “Corporations," $ 3.

after March 18, 1899, when Acts 1899, p. 177,
Title necessary to maintain particular actions.

No. 66, in relation to possession acquired by

payment of taxes under color of title, toox
See "Ejectment," $ 1; "Quieting Title," § 1; effect.-Price v. Greer (Ark.) 985.
"Trespass," $ 1.

In an action for trespass on lands, held, that

the verdict could not be sustained under the evi-
Titles of particular acts or proceedings.

dence. -Price v. Greer (Ark.) 985.
Statutes, see “Statutes," § 3.

In action for trespass on land, held, that the

answer sufficiently denied plaintiff's allegation

of payment of taxes on the land.-Price v.

Greer (Ark.) 985.
Causing death, see "Death," $ 1.

*In actions for trespass on land, it is not
Excessive damages, see "Damages," § 4. necessary for the complainant to deraign title,
Measure of damages, see "Damages," $ 3.

but only necessary for him to allege that he is

the owner or in possession.-Price v. Greer
By particular classes of parties.

(Ark.) 985.
See "Municipal Corporations," 8 8.

*In an action for trespass on land, plaintiff

must show either title or possession, and mere
Agents, see “Principal and Agent," 8 2.

color of title is not sufficient.-Price v. Greer
Employés, see "Master and Servant," $ 10.

(Ark.) 985.
Particular remedics for torts.

*One showing only a sheriff's deed on execu-
See "Trespass," $ 1; "Trover and Conversion," tion sale held not to have title to maintain

trespass.-Phillips v. Beattyville Mineral &
§ 2.

Timber Co. (Ky.) 1058.
Particular torts.

In trespass for cutting and removing timber
See "Assault and Battery," $ 1; “Conspiracy,” from plaintiff's land, evidence held not to
$ 1; "Fraud"; "Libel and Sander"; "Mali- show plaintiff to be the owner of the land on
cious Prosecution”; “Negligence''; "Nui- which the alleged trespass was committed.-
sunce"; "Rape," $ 3; "Trespass"; "Trover Cheatham v. Hicks (Ky.) 1093.
and Conversion."


See "Ejectment."
See "Schools and School Districts," $ 1.

Between landlord and tenant, see "Landlord
Validity of votes cast in wrong town, see and Tenant," $ 3.
“Elections," $ 1.

Equitable defenses, see “Equity," $ 1.

Harmless error, see “Appeal and Error," $ 24.

8 1. Right of action and defenses.

In trespass to try title, plaintiff, claiming on-
As cause of fire for which railroad was sued, der the sole heir of a former vendee, was not en-
see “Railroads," $ 9.

titled to recover without discharging the ven-
• Point annotated. See syllabus.



dor's lien to secure the purchase money, which Corporations," § 8; “Railroads," $ 6; "Street
had never been paid.—Wall v. Club Land & Cat- Railroads," $ 2.
tle Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 534.

For wrongful death, see "Death,” $ 1.
§ 2. Proceedings.

On bill or note, see "Bills and Notes," $ 6.
In trespass to try title, a charge to find for Probate proceedings, see “Wills," 2.

On insurance policy, see "Insurance,” 8 7.
plaintiff if defendant failed to establish the al- Suits to set aside fraudulent conveyances, see
legations of his plea in reconvention, without re-
quiring plaintiff to prove his right to posses. Trespass to try title to 'real property, see

“Fraudulent Conveyances," $ 2.
sion, held properly refused.--Freeman v. Slay
(Tex. Civ. App.) 404.

"Trespass to Try Title.”
Where the petition in trespass to try title

Trial of criminal prosecutions.
attacked the sheriff's deed, under which defend. See "Assault and Battery," 2; "Burglary,”
ant claimed, as void, piaintiff was not entitled

1; “Criminal Law, 88 14-18; "False
to relief on a showing that the deed was merely
voidable.—Temple v. Branch Saw Co. (Tex. Civ.

Pretenses"; "Homicide," $ 10; "Larceny,'
App.) 442.

§ 2; “Perjury," $ 2; "Rape," § 2; "Seduc-

tion," $ 1.

For establishing lottery, see “Lotteries,” $ 1.

For offense against liquor laws, see "Intoxicat-
See "New Trial"; "Witnesses."

ing Liquors,” $ 4.
Construction of contract as question for court, 8 1. Course and conduct of trial in gen-
see “Contracts," $ 1.

Harmless error relating to instructions, see In an action for injuries, a statement by the
“Appeal and Error," 25.

court in the presence of the jury, in ruling on
to damages,

"Dam- an objection to the examination of a juror as
ages," $ 5.

to his qualifications in the presence of the en-
Instructions as to negligence of passenger, see

tire panel, held not error.-Alexander V. Mc-
“Carriers," $ 7.

Gaffey (Tex. Civ. App.) 462.
Legal effect of dedication as question for court, 6 2. Reception of evidence.
see “Dedication," $ 1.

Under Kirby's Dig. $8 2743, 3190, exceptions
Negligence of passenger as question for jury, to depositions and documentary evidence are to

see “Carriers," $ 7.
Objections to instructions for purpose of review, ton v. Ashabraner (Ark.) 1011.

be determined before final submission.-Boyn-
see “Criminal Law," $ 22.
Questions relating to instructions presented for

Where a question is proper, but the answer
review, see “Appeal and Error," $ 12.

is improper and prejudicial, an objection im-
Trial of right to property levied on, see "At-mediately following the answer is timely.-
tachment," $ 2.

Waddell v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.)

Proceedings incident to trials.

Objection to improper answer to proper ques-

tion held to have fulfilled the purpose of a mo-
See “Continuance."

tion to strike.- Waddell v. Metropolitan St.
Entry of judgment after trial of issues, Bee Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 765.

“Judgment," $ 4.
Place of trial, see “Venue," 8 1.

Where it appeared on the examination of a
Right to trial by jury, see “Jury," $ 1.

witness for plaintiff in rebuttal that if the ex-
Summoning and impaneling jury, see "Jury,” | amination were allowed to proceed the court

would again have to go at large into testimony

in chief, it was proper to refuse to permit
Trial of particular civil actions or proceedings. the examination to so proceed.—Union Ry. Co.

v. Hunton (Tenn.) 182.
See “Cancellation of Instruments”; Con-

In an action against several defendants to
spiracy,” $ 1; "Libel and Slander,” § 3;
"Malicious Prosecution,” $ 3; “Negligence,

recover property transferred by a bankrupt in
$ 4; “Trespass to Try Title,” $ 2; “Trover mitted by agreement between the plaintiff and

fraud of his creditors, certain testimony, ad-
and Conversion,” 2.

certain of the defendants, held not harmful to
Against building and loan association for negli- other defendants.Horstman v. Little (Tex.

gence of contractor, see “Building and Loan Civ. App.) 286.

Against carrier for failure to furnish cars, see

Evidence of false statements of vendor, ad-
"Carriers," $ 1.

mitted on a claim by the purchaser for dam-
Condemnation proceedings, see "Eminent Do- ages, held to be excluded, where the case, when
main," § 2.

developed, shows the purchaser was not war-
Election contest, see "Elections," $ 3.

ranted in relying on them, or did not rely on
For accounting by broker, see “Brokers," $ 2. them.-Oneal v. Weisman (Tex. Civ. App.)
For breach of contract, see “Contracts," $ 3.

For breach of contract to transport passenger, An offer of competent evidence sufficient to
see "Carriers,” 8 5.

establish plaintiff's case should not be excluded,
For breach of warranty of goods sold, see because made after plaintiff has rested.-Pitts-
“Sales," $ 7.

burg Plate Glass Co. v. Roquemore (Tex. Civ.
For causing death, see "Death," $ 1.

App.) 449.
For compensation of broker, see “Brokers," $ 4.
For delay in shipment by carrier, see "Car $ 3. Arguments and conduct of counsel.
riers," $ 1.

Argument of counsel, unsupported by the evi-
For injuries from fires caused by operation of dence and derogatory to the opposite party, held
railroad, see "Railroads,” $ 9.

to constitute reversible error. - English v. An-
For injuries to live stock by carrier, see "Car- derson (Ark.) 583.
riers,” $ 2.

On an issue as to whether an alteration had
For injuries to live stock from operation of been made in a written contract, held not error
railroads, see "Railroads," $ 8.

for counsel to have called the jury's attention
For loss of cargo, see "Shipping," $ 1.

to the fact that the contract was in several
For personal injuries, see "Carriers," $. 6; handwritings.-Harrison v. Lakenan (Mo. Sup.)
"Master and Servant," $ 9; "Municipal | 53.

* Point annotated. See syllabus.

§ 2.

[ocr errors]

Where no objection was made to the allow- | the character of any witness, held proper. -
ance of time for argument, and plaintiff's coun: Harrison v. Lakenan (Mo. Sup.) 53.
sel argued for 35 minutes of the hour allowed
him, he cannot complain that the time was not discredited, a charge that the jury may reject

Where the testimony of a witness is wholly
equally distributed. --Ray v. Pecos & N. T. Ry. the testimony of any witness whom they believe
Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 466.

has willfully sworn falsely, etc., is proper. -
Rules fo the District Courts 39 (67 S. W. Fields v. Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.)
xxiii) held violated by an argument of plaintiff's 134.
counsel which appealed to the jury on consid-
erations other than the merits of the case.-St.

An instruction, in action for slander, author-
Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of Texas v. Boyd izing the jury, in making up their verdict, to
(Tex. Civ. App.) 509.

consider the facts and circumstances admitted

in evidence as produced by both parties, held
Rules for the District Courts 39 (67 S. W. error.-Grimes v. Thorp (No. App.) 638.
xxiii) held violated by an argument of plaintiff's
counsel which appealed to the self-interest of $ 7. Form, requisites, and suffi.
the jury.-St. Louis Southwestern Ry. Co. of

Texas v. Boyd (Tex. Civ. App.) 509.

An instruction held bad for giving promi-
Argument of counsel that the jury should err,

nence to certain evidence.- Louisville Ry. Co.
if at all, in giving excessive damages for per-

v. Hoskins' Adm'r (Ky.) 1087.
sonal injuries, as this could be cured on appeal: $ 8.
held improper.- Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. of

Applicability to pleadings and

Texas v. Nesbit (Tex. Civ. App.) 891,

A charge requested, which is not justified by
$ 4. Taking case or question from jury. the evidence, is properly refused.—Haxton v.

In an action on an insurance policy, where the Kansas City (Mo. Sup.) 714.
evidence as to value is uncontradicted, the ques- In an action on a note, an instruction held
tion of value need not be submitted to the jury. erroneous as excluding a good defense.-City
--American Cent. Ins. Co. v. Noe (Ark.) 572. of Cleburne v. Gutta Percha & Rubber Mfg.

Where there was substantial evidence intro- Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 300.
duced by plaintiff to establish the allegations In an action for injuries to plaintiff's son, an
of the petition, a demurrer to the evidence was instruction that if, at the time of his injuries,
properly overruled.—Harrison v. Lakevan (Mo. he was performing work outside the scope of
Sup.) 53.

his employment, he assumed the risk, held error.
The question whether a child was sui juris is,

-Wood v. Texas Cotton Product Co. (Tex. Civ.
when the evidence is all one way, a question for App.) 496.
the court; otherwise, for the jury.- Holmes v. It is not error to refuse a requested charge
Missouri Pac. Ry. Co. (Mo. Sup.) 623.

withdrawing from the jury an essential element
In considering whether a party is entitled to of an oral contract supported by the evidence
recover, all the evidence of both parties must of a party:-Texas Cent. Ry. Co. v. Miller
he reviewed, and, if there is any substantial (Tex. Civ. App.) 499.
testimony in support of his case, it must be
submitted to the jury.-Fields v. Missouri Pac.

8 9. Requests or prayers.
Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 134.

In an action for damages for breach of con-

tract, the request of an incorrect instruction
Though there be slight testimony, yet if its on the measure of damages held sufficient to
probative force be so weak that it only raises require the court to give a proper instruction
å mere surmise or suspicion of the existence on that point.-Nicola Bros. Co. v. Hurst (Ky.)
of the facts sought to be established, the court 1081.
should instruct a verdict.— Wills v. Central Ice
& Cold Storage Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 265.

In an action for injuries, an instruction on

damages held not objectionable.-Smith v. For-
§ 5. Instructions to jury-Province of dyce (Mo. Sup.) 679.
court and jury in general.

Where defendant, in an action for injuries
In an action against a railroad for wrongful to a servant, desires to have the question of
death, certain instructions held not erroneous assumption of risk submitted to the jury, it is
as an expression of the court's opinion on the his duty to pray an instruction to that effect.-
evidence. --St. Louis, I. M. & S. Ry. Co. v. Smith v. Fordyce (Mo. Sup.) 679.
Hitt (Ark.) 908, 990.

A charge requested, which is covered by the
In an action on a contract on which de instructions given, is properly given.--Haxton
fendants pleaded fraud, instructions on that

v. Kansas City (Mo. Sup.) 714.
subject held correct.-Craft v. Barron (Ky.)

Omission in a charge held not to be com-

plained of by one asking a special charge in
In proceedings to condemn land for a railroad effect like it.-Oneal v.°Weisman (Tex. Civ.
right of way, an instruction held error, as as: App.) 290.
suming that the construction of a proposed depot
and switches constituted a special benefit to de- Where a charge was correct as far as it went,
fendant's land.-Kirby v. Panhandle & G. Ry. plaintiff could not avail himself of an error of
Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 281.

omission therein without having requested a
It is not error to assume in the charge facts Civ. App.) 404.

charge to supply it.-Freeman v. Slay (Tex.
established by uncontroverted evidence.-
Vorthern Texas Traction Co. v. Yates (Tex. There is no error in refusing to give a special
Civ. App.) 283,

charge, where the issue to which it relates was

fully covered by the general charge and another
In an action against a carrier for damages to special charge given at the same party's re-
a shipment of cattle, an instruction held prop-quest.-Parlin & Orendorff Co. v. Vawter (Tex.
erly refused as being on the weight of evidence. Civ. App.) 407.
-Texas Cent. Ry. Co. v. Miller (Tex. Civ.
App.) 499.

In an action for injuries, an instruction,

though defective, held sufficient to direct the
$ 6. Necessity and subject-matter. court's attention to the matter, making it in-

An instruction that the jury, in determining cumbent to charge in reference thereto.-Ray
the credibility of testimony, might consider | v. Pecos & N. T. Ry. Co. (Tex. Civ. App.) 466.

* Point annotated. See syllabus.

[ocr errors]
« AnteriorContinuar »