Mack v. South Bound R. R.

Citations

• 52 S.C. 323
• 40 L.R.A. 679

Syllabus

<p>1. Railroads — Negligence—Evidence.—In an action against a railroad company for negligence, at common law, evidence of its failure to give the signals required by statute at public crossings near the accident is competent to support the allegation of reckless negligence.</p> <p>2. Evidence. — Testimony as to who travels and works a private crossing is irrelevant but harmless in an action for negligence at common law.</p> <p>3.. Nonsuit — Negligence—Trespass.—The testimony tended to show negligence on the part of the railroad company, and that plaintiff was not an ordinary trespasser, and nonsuit properly refused.</p> <p>4. Railroads — Damages—Negligence—Fbight.—A railroad company is liable in damages for mental or physical injuries sustained in consequence of fright caused by its negligence.</p> <p>5. Minority — Negligence.—Jury not instructed that the minority of plaintiff exempted him from looking and listening for approaching trains.</p> <p>6. Railroads — Ibid.—A railroad company is not bound to slacken the speed of its train upon seeing one approaching its track, unless the circumstances indicate that he does not, or cannot, see the train.</p> <p>7. Charge — Exemplary Damages — Negligence.—Upon examination of wliole charge, it is evident that Judge did not intend to charge that defendant was liable for exemplary damages in case there was only ordinary negligence.</p> <p>8. Railroads — Stock—Negligence.—The killing of stock by a railroad train raises the presumption of negligence, and that presumption is not destroyed by the mere fact that the witnesses have detailed the., circumstances of the killing.</p> <p>9. Charge — Exemplary Damages. — Charge as to circumstances under which smart money may be given correct.</p>