The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-10-24

while in the act of coupling two cars in the discharge of his duties Code,
 section 27), where the negligence con sisted in a failure on the part or the defendant company to comply with the provisions and requirements of the ss fety Appiiance Act of Congress. which requires railroad companies to equip cars used in interstate com merce with automatic .couplers ttsa " s. Stat. at large 53l.o ssL.st A. Same: same In such a case re- covery can be had under section 27 Of the Code of 1886, against an employer for the death of an employe, wnich is shown to have resulted by reason or the failure of the employer to comply
 with the requirements Of said Act or Congress.
 9. Action for killing employe oy failure to comply with Act of Con- rress: assumption of risk no defense. Tn an action against a railroad com pany to recover damages for the al- ieged negligent killing of plaintihs in- testate, who was in the defendants employment as a brakeman at the time he was killed and was attempting 70 couple cars in the discharge of his
 duty, where the negligence complained
 of consisted of a failure on the part of the defendant to comply with the
 
 Safety Appliance Act of Congress (2I
 U. s. Stat. at large. p. 5SI, pleas setting up as a defense to such action
 that the plaintiffs intestate assumed the risk incident to his employment
 presents no defense. and should pc
 striken on motions~ .een9 ..gY.i
 l0. Same; suff1cieucy Of complaint'--
 In such an action, 1t Is not necessary
 in order to. state a cause or actioh'
 that the complaint should aver in de-
 tail the quo modo by which the failr
 aure of the defendant to equip his
 cars. as required by the act of Con
 Rress, resulted in the death of piainthns Int estate. ss,.sN t'gs 'sfE ' .t1sss 70 il. Action for negligent killing oa employe: admissibility of evidence. .---ln an action against a railroad company to recover damages for the alleged negligent killing of plaintlns intestate' who was in the defendants employ ment as A brakeman, and at tine time he was killed, had gone between two cars for the purpose of coupling them together In the discharge Of his duties' where the evidence showed that the coupling was made on sharp curve in the defendants track, and that the nIaintiff's intestate went between the cars on the inside of the curve, and 1 the contention of the defendant was | that there was not space enough on the inside curve between the cars when the cars came together for a, person to attempt to make the coupling without heinr crushed, and there was testimony introduced on the part of the defendant tending to support this contention, tt is competent for the plaintiff to prove that a coupling was made oy another empIoye between two cars of the same train from the inside curve just before the accident to the plaintiffs intestate. f2. Pleading and practice: when mo-
 tion to exclude all evidence on the part of plaintiff properly overruled.--- On the trial of a civil case. when there is evidence introduced on the part or
 plaintiff tending to support the aver
 menta of each count of the complaint,
 d motion by thei defendant to exclude
 all the evidence offered in behalf Of the
 plaintiff on the ground that no prima
 facie case had been made by such eVl-
 dence, Is properly overruied.
 l3. Action for negligence; contrtbu-
 tory negligence; charges in reference
 thereto.-In an action to recover
 damages for the alleged negligent kill ing of plaintiffs intestate, where the
 defense introduced is contributory neg ligence, if the testimony introduced by inc plaintiff establishes the pleas of
 contributory negligence. 1t is not proper
 for the defendant to move to dismiss
 the evidence offered upon behalf of the
 plaintiff on such ground, but the fact
 of the contributory negligence being
 shown should be taken advantage of by
 the defendant by requesting the court
 in writing to give the general afhrra- tive charge for the defendant.
 14. Pleading and practice; appeal; charge of couurt to jury.--On an appeal the assigning as error by the appellant of the giving or refusal of several writ ten charges in one general assignment will not avail to put the trial court in error, unless each of the given charges was erroneous. or everyone of the refused charges were correct.
 IS. Complaint containing several separate counts: charge in reference thereto.-In an action to recover dama- ges for negligence, where the complaint contains eight separate counts. a charge asserts a correct proposition of law and should be given at the request of the plaintiff which instructs the jury that each one of the eight counts of the complaint is in the nature Of a
 seperate suit and if the plaintiff has proven any one of his counts. he is en- titled to recover unless the defendant has established some defense. pleaded thereto"
 Is. Burden of proving eontributory
 negligence; charge in reference there
 to.--In an action to recover damages
 for negligence on the part of the plsint-
 if. the burden of proving the plea of
 eontrihutory negligence Is upon the de-