Southern Pine Electric Power Ass'n v. Denson, 38233
| Decision Date | 26 May 1952 |
| Docket Number | No. 38233,38233 |
| Citation | 59 So.2d 75,214 Miss. 397 |
| Parties | SOUTHERN PINE ELECTRIC POWER ASS'N v. DENSON. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Butler, Snow & O'Mara, Jackson, Miss., for appellant.
McFarland & McFarland, Bay Springs, Melvin, Melvin, & Melvin, Laurel, O. M. Oates, Bay Springs, James D. Hester, Laurel, for appellee.
On this suggestion of error the appellant does not reargue the question of whether or not it was guilty of negligence in connection with the death of the decedent, E. J. Stringer, but addresses the argument to the question (1) of whether or not this Court erred in holding that since the answer of the appellant, as defendant in the trial court, did not plead as an affirmative defense that Mrs. Stringer, who came to her death on the same occasion, survived her husband, no issue of survivorship was presented, even though evidence on that point was admitted without any objection on the part of the appellee, as plaintiff; and (2) whether or not this Court erred in not holding that the question of whether or not Mrs. Stringer survived her husband for only a few moments is controlling on the question of damages and that proof of her survivorship merely tended to reduce the damages and was not an affirmative defense which had to be specially pleaded.
At the conclusion of the evidence offered by the plaintiff, the defendant requested a directed verdict in its favor, setting forth six specific grounds therefor, and all of which were directed to the alleged insufficiency of the proof to show that the defendant was guilty of any negligence which proximately caused, or contributed to, the death of the decedent, E. J. Stringer.
The question of whether or not Mrs. Stringer survived him was not set up as an affirmative defense to defeat any liability for damages, that is to say in bar of the alleged cause of action, although the defendant introduced some testimony, without objection on the part of the plaintiff, which tended to show that Mrs. Stringer had survived her husband. The question of her survivorship was called to the attention of the trial court in two refused instructions to the jury which would have informed the jurors that in the event they should believe from a preponderance of the evidence that Mrs. Stringer survived her husband, the amount of the verdict, if any, should be for nominal damages only, or in such amount as would compensate for the loss of the companionship of her husband during the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mississippi Power & Light Co. v. Shepard
...judgment against the power company, Judge Kyle quoted from Southern Pine Electric Power Ass'n v. Denson, 214 Miss. 397, 57 So.2d 859, 59 So.2d 75 (1952) as follows: 'Electricity is a highly dangerous agency, and it must be denominated negligence to erect so close to the well a high voltage ......
-
Mathews v. Thompson (State Report Title: Matthews v. Thompson)
...v. Canton Flying Services, Inc., 209 Miss. 226, 46 So.2d 533; Southern Pine Elec. Power Ass'n v. Denson, 214 Miss. 397, 57 So.2d 859, 59 So.2d 75; Brown-Miller Co. v. Howell, Miss., 79 So.2d Tied together in the solution of this lawsuit are the questions of proximate, contributing, and inte......
-
Lovell v. Oahe Elec. Co-op.
...power line was known to the company. In Southern Pine Elec. Power Ass'n v. Denson, 214 Miss. 397, 57 So.2d 859 (1952), aff'd, 214 Miss. 397, 59 So.2d 75 (1952), liability was affixed against a power company when a man and his wife were electrocuted when removing a pump with a 21-foot pipe a......
-
Denman v. Denman, 42003
...Palmer v. Clarksdale Hospital, 206 Miss. 680, 49 So.2d 582; Southern Pine Electric Power Ass'n v. Denson, 214 Miss. 397, 57 So.2d 859, 59 So.2d 75; Farish v. Canton Flying Services, Inc., 214 Miss. 370, 58 So.2d 915; Thompson v. Jenkins, 330 S.W.2d 802. In determining the question as to whe......