Skip to main content
· 3/15/1915

Yazoo & M. V. R. v. Messina

Citations

  • 109 Miss. 143
  • 67 So. 963

Syllabus

<p>1. Cabbters. Derailment of train. Prima fade evidence. Instructions. Personal injuries. Proof. Trial. Request for instructions. Necessity. Appeal anü> error. Harmless error. Surgeons. Privileged, Communications. Witnesses. Free transportation. Application of statute.</p> <p>In a suit for injuries caused by the derailment of a train on which plaintiff was riding, either as a trespasser or licensee, when plaintiff’s testimony, as to the^speed of the train, tended to show that the engineer’s negligence was wanton and in reckless disregard of consequences, it was not error to give an instruction to plaintiff based upon the prima facie statute, section 1985, Code 1906, which provides, that in all actions against a railroad company for injury to person or property, proof of injury by the running of the locomotives or cars shall be prima facie evidence of want of reasonable skill and care of the servants of the company.</p> <p>2. Carriers. Personal injuries. Instruction. Proof.</p> <p>In an action for injuries caused by the derailment of a train being run at an excessive speed, an instruction to find for plaintiff “if all the evidence left it doubtful,” as to whether defendant had met the burden placed on it by the prima facie statute (Code 1906, section 1985') was erroneous, as placing on defendant a greater burden than the law required it to sustain; the burden of proof under the statute being merely that of showing the facts, when the liability will be determined by the facts as shown.1</p> <p>3. Trial. Instructions. Request for.</p> <p>Under Code 1906, section 793, prohibiting the giving of instructions not requested in writing, defendant could not predicate error on the failure of the court to give instructions counter to those given at plaintiff’s request, where no request was made for such counter instructions.</p> <p>4. Trial. Instructions. Request. Necessity.</p> <p>In an action for personal injury, is not error for the court to fail to give an instruction limi

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • LaSalle sent about forty letters to Fogarty, his neighbors and his employer making threats, accusations, and derogatory remarks; Fogarty stated a cause of action for intentional infliction of emotional distress
  • where the underlying tort concerned intentional infliction of emotional distress

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cook

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.