Opinion ID: 1730183
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Appeal from the Judgment for the Engineer Johnson

Text: We have considered the points argued under the errors assigned to the judgment in favor of the engineer, Johnson. So far as the judgment for the railroad is concerned, we have held in the foregoing portion of this opinion that there was sufficient evidence and lawful inferences which might be drawn therefrom to have required the submission of the case to the jury. It was, therefore, entirely proper on the same evidence for the jury to consider the question of the liability of the engineer Johnson as alleged in the complaint where he was charged with six specific acts of negligence. Whether the engineer was guilty of all or any of the specific acts of negligence was a question to be determined by the jury, on the same basis as against the railroad and for the same reasons we have enumerated. We have carefully considered the several points urged by the appellants concerning the invalidity of this judgment but we find them to be without merit. The judgment, therefore, in favor of the defendant Johnson is affirmed. Affirmed in part and reversed in part. TERRELL, C.J., and ROBERTS, THORNAL and O'CONNELL, JJ., concur.