The Indiana, Bloomington and Western Railway Company v. Overton

Citation20 N.E. 147,117 Ind. 253
Decision Date02 February 1889
Docket Number13,427
PartiesThe Indiana, Bloomington and Western Railway Company v. Overton
CourtSupreme Court of Indiana

Petition for a Rehearing Overruled March 30, 1889.

From the Clinton Circuit Court.

The judgment is reversed, with costs, with directions to sustain the appellant's motion for a new trial.

C. W Fairbanks and W. R. Moore, for appellant.

M. E Clodfelter, T. E. Ballard, -- Adams and H. C. Sheridan, for appellee.

OPINION

Mitchell, J.

Overton sued the railroad company to recover damages for the alleged intentional killing of his cow at a highway crossing.

He charged in his complaint "that the defendant, for the purpose and with the intention of running its train of cars over and upon said cow, wilfully, recklessly and carelessly" ran its train at a great and unusual rate of speed over and through the streets of the city of Crawfordsville, in violation of an ordinance of the city, and over and upon the plaintiff's cow, and thereby wantonly and wilfully killed the animal.

While there are some ambiguous averments in the complaint, it nevertheless charges that the servants of the railroad company recklessly committed some acts, and wilfully omitted others, with the purpose and intention of running the train of cars over and upon the plaintiff's cow. It is contended on the plaintiff's behalf here that the facts averred show that the animal was purposely and intentionally run upon, and that the facts stated make the complaint good upon that theory. We are constrained to adopt this view. Gregory v. Cleveland, etc., R. R. Co., 112 Ind. 385, 14 N.E. 228, and cases cited.

The demurrer to the complaint was therefore properly overruled. The evidence fails completely, however, to sustain the complaint.

There is an entire absence of evidence tending to show either an actual or constructive intent on the part of any person connected with the management of the train to run upon or over the plaintiff's cow.

The engineer in charge of the engine testified that he did not see the cow upon the track until he was within about one hundred feet of the crossing, and that he had no intention whatever of running upon the animal. There is not a syllable of testimony, nor are there any circumstances, tending to contradict the engineer's evidence.

It does not appear that the train was being run at a dangerous or unusual rate of speed, nor was it shown that the crossing...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Loose-Wiles Biscuit Co. v. Jolly
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Arkansas
    • March 13, 1922
    ...... one of the company's automobiles, on the company's. business, at a ......
  • Ind. v. Overton
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Indiana
    • February 2, 1889
    ......& W. Ry. Co.v.Overton.1Supreme Court of Indiana.February 2, 1889.         Appeal from circuit ...Overton against the Indiana, Bloomington & Western Railway Company, for the alleged intentional ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT