Walls v. Windsor
| Decision Date | 27 January 1915 |
| Court | Delaware Superior Court |
| Parties | JOSIAH H. WALLS v. CHARLES C. WINDSOR |
Superior Court, Sussex County, adjourned October Term, 1914.
ACTION ON THE CASE (No. 37, February Term, 1914) by Josiah H. Walls against Charles C. Windsor, to recover damages for the loss of his horse, alleged to have been occasioned by the negligence of the defendant in so driving his automobile on a public street, in the Town of Lincoln, that the horse became frightened and reared and fell upon a hitching post, causing its death two days thereafter. The owner of the horse was standing at its head near the post opposite a store where he had stopped with halter in hand when the accident occurred.
The defendant insisted that if he passed the horse with his machine on the day of the accident, he did not observe the plaintiff or his horse.
Testimony was introduced for the plaintiff that the defendant did drive past the horse at or about the time of the accident.
Testimony was introduced on behalf of the defendant to the effect that the horse had habits of rearing and falling.
Verdict for defendant.
Robert C. White and James M. Tunnell for plaintiff.
Daniel J. Layton, Jr., for defendant.
OPINION
BOYCE, J., charging the jury:
Gentlemen of the jury:--This is an action brought by Josiah H. Walls against Charles C. Windsor to recover damages for the loss of his horse, alleged to have been occasioned by the negligence of the defendant.
The plaintiff relies upon the second count in his declaration by which he charges, in substance, that on the sixth day of July, A. D. 1911, at the Town of Lincoln, this county, the defendant, while operating and driving his automobile over and along a certain street or public highway in said town, approached the plaintiff, who was then and there driving his horse over and along said street or highway, and that when the defendant saw the horse appeared to be unmanageable, because of fright at the approach of the automobile, the defendant negligently and carelessly omitted and refused to bring his automobile to a stop, although signaled by the plaintiff to do so, and that, by reason thereof, the horse became frightened and reared and fell down upon a post, standing and fastened in the ground, and the post wounded, pierced and lacerated the body of the horse and that two days thereafter the horse died in consequence thereof.
The defendant denies that he saw the horse at the time and place alleged, or that the injuries complained of were occasioned by any negligence whatever on his part.
It is provided by an act of assembly of this state that:
"Upon approaching any person walking upon the public highways, or a horse, horses, or other draft animals being led, ridden or driven, the operator of the motor vehicle shall give reasonable warning of his approach and use every precaution to avoid injuring such persons or frightening such animals bringing his motor vehicle to a stop, should such animals appear to be unmanageable, stopping his engine, if the occasion require...
To continue reading
Request your trial