St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad v. Noland

Citations

• 75 Kan. 691
• 90 P. 273
• 1907 Kan. LEXIS 116

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COUET.</p> <p>1. RAILROADS — Injury by Fire — Sufficiency of Evidence. Evidence examined and found to be sufficient to require the submission thereof to the jury.</p> <p>2. - Origin of Fire — Circumstantial Evidence. Where a fire starts upon a right of way belonging to a railway company soon after a train has passed' the point where the fire started, whether the fire originated from the locomotive en7 gine of such train or not is a question of fact, which may be determined from circumstantial evidence.</p> <p>3. Judgments — Joint Tort-feasors. Where two railway companies are jointly charged with negligently setting out a fire, judgment may properly be entered against either, or both, as may be proper under the evidence.</p> <p>4. Damages — Injury by Fire. Where a railway company negligently sets out a fire which destroys an orchard of fruit-trees it is proper in estimating the damages sustained thereby to show the value of the trees destroyed independently of their relation to the freehold, and also the value of the farm before and after the fire; and the evidence so given should all be submitted to, and considered by, the jury.</p> <p>5. Practice, District Court — Instructions—Request. When it is desired to have particular questions of law presented to the jury a written request should be made to the court so to instruct.</p> <p>6. Evidence — Expert—Equipment and Operation of Engines— Fire. In an action to recover damages from a railway company on account of a fire which has been negligently set out by one of its locomotive engines it will not be deemed erroneous for the court to permit the plaintiff to show by hypothetical questions propounded to experts that a locomotive, engine will not set out a fire when properly equipped and', carefully operated.</p>