Disher v. South Carolina & Georgia R. R.

Citations

• 55 S.C. 187
• 33 S.E. 172
• 1899 S.C. LEXIS 89

Syllabus

<p>1. New Trial — Juror.—Motion to suspend appeal to permit appellant to move below for new trial on ground that a juror was not a registered elector refused, for reasons given in Mew v. R. R., ante.</p> <p>2. Evidence — Physicians.—Whether plaintiff spoke bitterly of his doctor, or had discharged him, would not tend to prove that his permanent injury was the result of improper treatment by his physician.</p> <p>3. Negligence — Contributory Negligence. — A Charge as to contributory negligence, that plaintiff “would not be barred if injury was caused by negligence of defendant,” not reversible error, when the jury are explicitly instructed that negligence of plaintiff will not bar the action if negligence of defendant was the direct and proximate cause of the injury.</p> <p>4. Ibid. — Ibid..—Charge.—While an instruction to the effect that contributory negligence would not defeat the action, if it could have been avoided by reasonable care and prudence by defendant, is not accurately correct, yet it is not prejudicial error, where the jury in the main charge is specifically instructed that contributory negligence, if a proximate cause of the injury, would defeat the action.</p> <p>5. Railroads. — Circuit Judge did not rule whether Rev. Stat., 1684, required the train to stop at the crossing to let off passengers, or to avoid collision, and his failure to do so was not error.</p>