Lockridge v. Fesler

• Decision Date: 23 September 1896
• Citation: Lockridge v. Fesler, 37 S. W. 65 (Ky. Ct. App. 1896)
• Parties: LOCKRIDGE v. FESLER et al.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

37 S.W. 65

LOCKRIDGE v. FESLER et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

September 23, 1896

Appeal from circuit court, Montgomery county.

"Not to be officially reported."

Action by Thomas Fesler and another against D. S. Lockridge to recover damages for the death of a horse. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendant appeals. Reversed.

O'Rear & Bigstaff and C. P. Chenault, for appellant.

LANDES J.

The appellant was a livery stable keeper in the city of Mt Sterling, and the appellees were the owners of a valuable horse, which was left at the stable of appellant by appellee Fesler, and hitched under a shed attached to the stable. The horse slipped the halter, and escaped from the lot, and, in running upon the street, slipped and fell, and was so badly hurt from the fall that he died in about 20 minutes after being hurt. It appears from the evidence that appellee Fesler had an arrangement with the appellant by which he was to hitch the horse in the stable whenever he came to town, for safe-keeping, and for which he was to pay to the appellant $15 by the year. On the day upon which the horse was hurt appellee Fesler drove him to the stable, where one of the hands employed there took charge of him, and put a rope halter on over the bridle, without removing or detaching the reins, and hitched him in the shed, which was in the stable lot, and was inclosed by a fence, the entrance to the lot being through an opening closed by a set of bars. At the time the horse was hitched under the shed, the weight of the evidence showed the bars were up; but, having slipped the halter, the horse escaped into the street, the bars having been let down in some way, or by some one, not clearly shown by the evidence. It was made to appear with sufficient clearness from the evidence that the horse was hitched in the way that was usual or customary at that stable, and that appellee Fesler saw the manner in which the halter was placed and the horse hitched, and it did not appear that he objected to it. But it was alleged that the hitching was done in a careless manner, the halter being so loosely and carelessly placed on the horse that he got loose, and that, the "gates and doors" having been carelessly and negligently "left open," the horse ran into the street, and "slipped and fell, and killed himself." The allegation was made "that it was through the negligent and careless hitching of said horse with ropes and halters, insufficient to hold him, and so carelessly and negligently put upon said horse, that caused him to get loose; *** and, through the negligence and carelessness of defendant's employés, the gates and doors were left open and let said horse aforesaid upon the streets and upon said sidewalk, where he slipped as aforesaid, and killed himself." These allegations having been traversed, a demurrer to the answer having been filed and overruled, the case was submitted to a jury, which, under the instructions of the court,...