Case ID: ga_99/html/0628-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      Atkinson, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ATLANTA & W. P. R. R. CO. v. IRWIN.
    November 2, 1896. Argued at the last term.
   Atkinson, J.

The evidence showing beyond doubt that the plaintiffs mule was killed by the defendant’s train and the presumption of negligence being against the company, a prima facie right to recover was shown. The evidence relied upon by the defendant to show due diligence was contradicted by other evidence; and therefore, on the whole, the verdict was sufficiently supported, and there was no abuse of discretion in denying a new trial. Judgment affirmed.

Appeal. Before Judge Harris. Campbell superior court. August term, 1895.

Dorsey, Brewster <$> Howell, L. 8. Rocm and C. 8. Reid, for plaintiff in error. Longino & Golightly, contra.