Union Pac. R. v. Lucas

Citations

• 136 F. 374
• 69 C.C.A. 218
• 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 4467

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice — Conflicting Evidence fob Jury.</p> <p>Where the substantial evidence upon a material issue of fact is conflicting, the question is for the jury and not for the court.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 46, Cent. Dig. Trial, §§ 342, 343.]</p> <p>2. Railroads — Fires—Evidence—Values—Owner May Testify Though not an Expert.</p> <p>The owner of property who personally purchased' and used it may testify to its value, although not an expert upon that subject.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see vol. 20, Cent. Dig. Evidence, § 2217.]</p> <p>The owner of land and buildings which he purchased and used in his business may testify to the value of the land with the buildings and to the value of the land without them, in order to prove the damage from their destruction, after he has testified that he knows their value, and that they were situated in a small village, where there were few sales, although he was not familiar with other purchases or sales of such property.</p> <p>The owner of a stock of goods may testify to their value in a single sum after evidence has been introduced that he was the active manager of the business conducted with the stock, that he knew its value, thát the goods and his inventory of them were burned, and that he cannot give the items of the stock in detail.</p> <p>3. Same — Insurance as Evidence of Value.</p> <p>The refusal of admission of evidence of the amount of insurance upon property upon the issue of its value is not reversible error.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>