Ga. S. & P. Ry. Co v. Thompson
| Decision Date | 08 August 1900 |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
| Parties | GEORGIA S. & P. RY. CO. v. THOMPSON. |
RAILROADS—INJURY TO LIVE STOCK.
The railway company introduced positive testimony which fully overcame the legal presumption upon which alone the plaintiff's case rested. Its witnesses were entitled to be believed, for they were not directly contradicted; and the circumstantial evidence by which it was sought to discredit them, while consistent with the theory that they did not swear truly, was also consistent with the theory that they did. In such case the positive testimony must control.
(Syllabus by the Court.)
Error from superior court, Bibb county; W. H. Felton, Jr., Judge.
Action by J. B. Thompson against the Georgia Southern & Florida Railway Company. Judgment for plaintiff. Defendant brings error. Reversed.
Geo. S. Jones and R. C. Jordan, for plaintiff in error.
E. P. Johnston, for defendant in error.
There was a head-end collision between a moving locomotive and a stationary bull, the latter showing fight, and manifesting total ignorance of the doctrine of impenetrability. The company's servants in charge of the locomotive were better versed in the principles of natural philosophy, and, according to their testimony, did their best to save the animal from the consequences of his rashness; but, in spite of their well-directed efforts, the crash came, with its inevitable result. They were the only eyewitnesses. At the trial the plaintiff proved certain circumstances which were consistent with his contention that the defendant's witnesses did not state accurately the details of the catastrophe, but these circumstances were also perfectly consistent with the company's contention that its witnesses gave an entirely correct version of what occurred. Under the well-settled rules of evidence applicable to such a case, it must be held that the defendant's witnesses were in no legal or fair sense discredited, and that the verdict in the plaintiff's favor cannot lawfully stand. Judgment reversed. All the justices concurring.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sellers v. State
...863; Patton v. State, 117 Ga. 230(5), 43 S.E. 533; Frazier v. Georgia R. etc. Co., 108 Ga. 807, 33 S.E. 996; Georgia Southern & Fla. Ry. Co. v. Thompson, 111 Ga. 731, 36 S.E. 945; Taggart v. Savannah Gas Co., 179 Ga. 181, 175 S.E. 491; Jones v. State, 48 Ga. 163, 164; Moore v. Dutson, 79 Ga......
-
Central of Georgia Ry. Co. v. Mote
... ... circumstances." In the cases of W. & A. R. Co. v ... Beason, 112 Ga. 553, 37 S.E. 863; South Carolina R ... Co. v. Powell, 108 Ga. 437, 33 S.E. 994; Ga. Sou ... Ry. Co. v. Sanders, 111 Ga. 128, 36 S.E. 458; So ... Ry. Co. v. Thompson, 111 Ga. 731, 36 S.E. 945; Ga ... R. Co. v. Wall, 80 Ga. 202, 7 S.E. 639; Macon R. Co ... v. Revis, 119 Ga. 332, 46 S.E. 418; Seaboard A. L ... Ry. v. Walthour, 117 Ga. 427, 43 S.E. 720; Ga. & Ala. R. Co. v. Cook, 114 Ga. 760, 40 S.E. 718; White ... v. Sou. Ry. Co., 123 Ga. 360, ... ...
-
Richards v. Oregon Short Line Railroad Co.
... ... J. Harris, ... Action ... by Jesse S. Richards against the Oregon Short Line Railroad ... Judgment ... for plaintiff. Defendant appeals ... REVERSED AND REMANDED FOR NEW TRIAL ... P. L ... Williams, Geo. H. Smith, Frank Nebeker and H. B. Thompson for ... appellant ... Richards ... & Boyd for respondent ... FRICK, ... C. J. McCARTY, J., STRAUP, J., concurring ... [41 ... Utah 100] FRICK, C. J ... Respondent ... recovered judgment against appellant for damages which he ... ...