Miles v. Postal Tel. Cable Co.

Citations

• 55 S.C. 403
• 33 S.E. 493

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence. — Unless some material matter is sought to be brought out by the introduction of a scientific rule book, its exclusion from evidence works no harm.</p> <p>2. Ibid. — Highways.—A County Supervisor is a proper witness to testify that a certain road in his county is not a highway.</p> <p>3. Charge is not on the facts, when stating issues raised by the pleadings.</p> <p>4. Telegraph Co. — A land owner does not encroach on the rights of a telegraph company by building a house on his abutting line near the company’s pole.</p> <p>5. A Telegraph Company must so construct its wires on a public way as not to endanger the building of an abutting owner.</p> <p>6. Charge — Propositions of law charged and applicable to one case should be charged in another, provided, both cases are similar in pleadings and testimony. Mitchell v. Light & Power Co., 45 S. C., 146, distinguished from this.</p> <p>7. Telegraph Co. — Electric System — Negligence—Damages.—The same degree of care to prevent danger to adjoining property is not required of an ordinary adjoining owner, as of an electric system.</p> <p>8. Negligence — Accident.—It would not be proper to instruct a jury, “that an injury that is the result of many fortuitous circumstances is an accident, and not actionable.” Definition of injuries arising from accidents not actionable, approved.</p> <p>9. Harmless Error. — A discussion between Judge and lawyer as to admissibility of certain evidence after it is ruled out can work no harm.</p> <p>10. Telegraph Co. — Negligence.—Charge excepted to is not on facts, but simply illustrative of rule of care required of telegraph companies in erecting and maintaining their wires.</p>