Hilligoss v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.

Citations

• 84 Kan. 372
• 114 P. 383
• 1911 Kan. LEXIS 334

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Damages — Injury by Fire — Market Value of Growing Crops. In an action for damages from fire it is not error to admit evidence of the value per ton of a crop of timothy and clover destroyed, or of the cost of restoring a hedge to its former condition.</p> <p>2. Evidence — Error in Striking Out Cured by Subsequent Testimony. Error in striking out the testimony of an inspector that he found a spark arrester to be in first-class condition held to have been cured by his subsequent testimony that no repairs were made at the time because none was needed.</p> <p>3. Railroads — Injury by Fire — Proof of Negligence — Presumption — Special Findings. In an action against a railway company for a fire caused by the operation of its railroad, in view of the statute creating a presumption that a fire so caused is the result of negligence it is not necessary, in order to sustain a verdict for the plaintiff, that the jury shall be able to specify in what respect the defendant was negligent; and where in reply to special questions whether the defendant was negligent in several distinct particulars the jury state that they do not know, it is not error to refuse to require more definite answers.</p> <p>4. Instructions — Error Cured by Special Findings. In such an action an erroneous instruction as to the degree of care required of the company in the construction of its engines is nonprejudicial where the jury find that it has failed, to disprove negligence in the inspection and operation of the engine which caused the fire.</p>