The Montgomery advertiser., 1907-03-23
Head Notes Of Me Decisions
 Of Alabama Supreme Court

NASHVILLE. CHATTANOOGA AND
 ST. LOUIS RY. v. MOORE Action for Damages for Ejecting Pas.
 senger. ~ fDecided June 30, faes |.
 4i So. Rep. 9s4.)
 T.. Appeal: scope of review; as. sisnments of error .--whether the ev- idence was sufTicient to sustain the verdict, or confroverted questions of fact cannot be reviewed. on appeal. in the absence of error assigned conn plaiuing of failure to grant a new trial.
 !. witnesses; examination; repeti- tor. "A witness having testified that the passengers were much annoyed by plaintiffs conduct. the aefend tnl not pre1udiced by the. refusal of the court to allow a repetition of the state ment.
 a Carriers: passengers; election; misconduct. Conductors have the right, under Section 3457 of the Code. to eject passengers for causes therein enumerated, whether such conduct was, in fact offensive to the other passen- gers or not.
 (. Evidence; declarations of third person; res gestae The conductor be- inE present and having observed pla'n- tins conduct at the time he was eject ed, 1t was no part of the res gesfae that passengers called on the conductor to remove plaintiff from the train, or as to their opinion concerning the same.
 s. Appeal; exclusion of evidence; prejudice.-Evidence that plaintiff be- came more abusive than ever, but fall ing to give the words used. was prop erly excluded.
 6. Carriers; passengers; election: action; instruction.--A requested in- struction, in an action for election of a passenger, asserting that the con ductor is a police officer with duty to keep order on the train and eject all persons who use obscene or abus- i've language in the presence and hear ing of passengers, but emitting to qualify the force to be used by the conductor ss provided by Section 345I of the Code of 1886. is properly re- fused.
 '. Same; statutes. s.---Section 4345. Criminal Code 1896, has no application in an action for election of passen- ger because of his misconduct.
 g. Same; instructions.--A charge as- serttins that if. at the time of plaint- iff's alleged injury he was passen- ger on defendants train on which M. was conductor; that plaintiff was dis orderly in that he used profane lan- ruaRe making it necessary for the con- ductor to eject him and that plaintiff resisted and if plaintiff was injured be- cause of his resistance he could not recover, pretermlts all inquiry as to .he degree of force employed to over- come the resistance. and asserts as a fact that plaintiffs act made 1t nec- essary for the conductor to eject him and that his resistance was the cause of his Injury. and in consequence was properly refused.
 Appeal from Marshall Circuit Court.
 Heard before Hon James A. Bilbro.
 Affirmed. Opinion by Weakley, c. J.
 Hafalson. DowdeIl and Denson, JJ., concur.
 FOSTER. ct als, V. CARLISLE. ct als Ejeetment.--( Decided November go,
 1906. 42 So. Rep, 441.y
 E3eetment; evidence; admissibiiity.- In court of law, the title to land conveyed by mortgage vests in the nnortgagee. after the law day of the mortgage and default in payment. and thereafter the mortgagor has ouiy an equity of redemption, and the endorse ment of a credit on the mortgage made after the law day does not pass to the mortgagor any titio recognized in a Nntsrk raf r0unanuArnftw