Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Partridge

Citations

• 58 Fla. 153

Syllabus

<p>1. General objections to evidence proposed, -without stating the precise grounds of objection, are vague and nugatory, and are properly overruled, unless it plainly appears that the proffered evidence is prejudicial, improper and inadmissible for any purpose.</p> <p>2. The trial court is authorized to regulate the order of the introduction of evidence and its discretion in such a matter, either in receiving or rejecting it, will not be interfered with by an appellate court, unless an abuse of such discretion is clearly made to appear.</p> <p>3. The mere fact that proffered evidence is not full and complete within itself but formed only one link in the chain, so that it would have to be supplemented by other evidence in order to avail the party offering it, may not render such evidence incompetent or inadmissible.</p> <p>4. The finding of a referee upon conflicting evidence is entitled to the same weight as the verdict of a jury, and it will not be disturbed! by an appellate court, unless the preponderance of evidence is such as to justify the inferences that such finding was based upon influences other than a due consideration of the evidence.</p> <p>5. A bailee has such special property in the goods intrusted to him that he may maintain an action for damage thereto, so a factor, a broker, a warehouseman, a carrier or any person employed to perform a service in respect to the goods of another with which he is intrusted for that purpose, may maintain an action for the recovery of them, or for any damage done them while in his charge.</p> <p>6. One who is the owner of a number of crates of pears and has been intrusted as a commission man with a number of other crates of pears for the purpose of shipping and' selling them, such crates together constituting a car of fruit, may maintain an action against a railroad carrier for any damages occasioned by its negligence in transporting and delivering such car of fruit.</p>