Kimble v. Stackpole

Citations

• 60 Wash. 35
• 110 P. 677
• 1910 Wash. LEXIS 1008

Syllabus

<p>Highways— Runaway Team — Pleading— General Denial — Issues and Proof. In an action for injuries caused by a runaway team, a general denial of an allegation that the team, while under the joint control of the defendants, ran into the plaintiff, admits of evidence upon the part of the defense that the team was running away and beyond the control of the defendants.</p> <p>Pleading — Defenses—Contributory Negligence — Inconsistency. The plea of plaintiff’s contributory negligence is not necessarily inconsistent with a general denial of defendant’s negligence.</p> <p>Trial — Order of Proof — Rebuttal. In an action for injuries caused by a runaway team, evidence in rebuttal to show that the team was not beyond control when it reached a certain point, may be excluded, where the plaintiff’s witnesses were examined fully on this subject on their examination in chief.</p> <p>Highways — Runaway Team — Negligence—Sufficiency. In an action for injuries caused by a runaway team, a verdict for the defendants is properly airected where there was nothing to show what caused the team to run away, or that it was a fractious team, and it appeared that the defendants were not negligent and did all in their power to control it.</p> <p>Fullerton, J., dissents.</p>