Milne v. Walker
Decision Date | 13 July 1882 |
Citation | 59 Iowa 186,13 N.W. 101 |
Parties | MILNE v. WALKER. |
Court | Iowa Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Fayette district court.
The plaintiff claims damages of the defendant, and for cause of such claim alleges that the defendant so negligently tied a certain stallion of the defendant in plaintiff's barn, and with such a weak and insufficient halter, that the stallion broke loose and injured a horse of the plaintiff, standing in a stall in said barn, by breaking his leg. He avers that the damage was caused by the negligence of the defendant, and without fault or negligence on his part. There was a trial by jury, and a verdict and judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals.Ainsworth & Hobson and Hoyt & Hancock, for appellant.
D. W. Clements and A. S. Hollenbeck, for appellee.
1. After the plaintiff had introduced his evidence and rested his case, the court made the following oral statement: The plaintiff objected to the court instructing the jury orally, and insists that the judgment should be reversed for this error. It is true, the statute requires instructions given by the court to the jury to be in writing. But this instruction was really not an instruction by the court to the jury, directing them as to the law of the case. It was no more than a direction to them to return a verdict for the defendant. If this direction was warranted from the evidence, or rather from the want of evidence, in the case, the failure to put the order to the jury in writing was error without prejudice. We would surely not be asked to reverse the case and send it back for a new trial because of an error which did not and could not influence the verdict.
2. The undisputed facts are that in the spring of 1878 the defendant was the owner of a stallion which he moved from place to place, making the season. He called on the plaintiff, who is a farmer, and made application for a stopping place with his horse, to which the plaintiff assented. The stallion was by the plaintiff's direction put in a stall in the barn, and in the same part of the barn, and without any barrier being placed between them, the plaintiff kept a gelding and a mare. The three animals were kept in their stalls by means of halters, with which they were tied. On the defendant's second or third trip in going his...
To continue reading
Request your trial