Skip to main content
· 1/15/1894

Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Co. v. Harris

Citations

  • 33 Fla. 217

Syllabus

<p>1. A letter from an owner of live stock to a railroad company notifying it of the killing of his stock by a train, giving also the time and place of the killing, and expressing a desire to be informed as early as possible what the company will pay him for the stock, is not inadmissible as evidence of notice and claim for damages under the statute making- railroad companies that fail to erect and maintain fences sufficient to turn and exclude all live stock from their railroads, with stock-guards at certain crossings, on account of the omission of the letter to state the amount of the damage claimed; nor is a letter stating the amount claimed inadmissible because it was not written at the time of the killing, nor until seventy-five days after, or because it offers to to take less than the owner believes he was entitled to. The two letters held to constitute ample notice and presentation of claim under the statute.</p> <p>'.3. Where an instruction is not calculated to mislead the jury, although not as full or specific as it might he, and no request has been made for a fuller instruction, no advantage can be taken by the losing party on account of such deficiency.</p> <p>3. It can not be assumed as a matter of law that the general attorney of a railroad company is not a proper officer or agent to notify and present a claim to for damages to live stock under the railroad fence law, where the company has neither attempted to show that he was not suoli, and not made any objection to proof of demand upon him, on the ground that he was not such officer or agent.</p> <p>4. The railroad fence statute requires notice of claim to be given ‘•to any general agent or officer of such corporation or person, or to any station, depot or other agent or officer acting for said corporation in the county where the live stock was killed or injured.” Held, That the words subsequent to the word “offi- ■ cer,” where it appears the second time, do not qualify any of the preceding words exce

Judges: Raney

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.