Bugg v. Meredith

Decision Date18 March 1926
Docket Number6 Div. 618
Citation214 Ala. 264,107 So. 805
PartiesBUGG v. MEREDITH.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County, Bessemer Division; O.A. Steele, Judge.

Action by Ephraim Meredith against B.L. Bugg, as receiver for the Atlanta, Birmingham & Atlantic Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendant appeals. Transferred from Court of Appeals, under Code 1923, § 7326. Reversed and remanded.

Huey & Welch, of Bessemer, for appellant.

McEniry & McEniry, of Bessemer, for appellee.

ANDERSON, C.J.

It may be conceded that the plaintiff made out a prima facie case; yet, if the evidence of the engineer was true, the defendant was entitled to the general charge. It may also be conceded that the evidence of some of the witnesses, as to the tracks, was sufficient to afford an inference that it was untrue, so as to prevent the general charge for the defendant; still it was at least entitled to have its defense, with the hypothesis, submitted to the jury as embodied in refused charge 6. Central of Ga. R.R. v. Brister, 40 So. 512, 145 Ala. 432; Central of Ga. R. Co. v. Pittman, 80 So. 141, 16 Ala.App. 567, and cases cited. We do not find that this charge was so substantially covered by the defendant's given charges, or the oral charge, as to avoid a reversal of this case.

The judgment of the circuit court is reversed, and the cause is remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

SAYRE, GARDNER, and MILLER, JJ., concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Bugg v. Green
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • December 9, 1926
    ...judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Transferred from Court of Appeals under Code 1923, § 7326. Affirmed. See, also, Bugg v. Meredith, 214 Ala. 264, 107 So. 805. Gardner, and Thomas, JJ., dissenting in part. Huey & Welch, of Birmingham, for appellant. McEniry & McEniry, of Bessemer, f......
  • Gray v. Bank of Moundville
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • March 18, 1926
  • Louisville & N. R. Co. v. Self
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • March 4, 1970
    ...cannot be put in error for refusing to give either a general affirmative charge or the affirmative charge with hypothesis. Bugg v. Meredith, 214 Ala. 264, 107 So. 805. We consider the trial court to have been eminently fair to appellant in having given, at its request, written charges 2, 3 ......

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