Court Opinion

ID: 9831776
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:21:06.211305+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:37.865448
License: Public Domain

On Rehearing.
We have carefully examined and considered appellant’s motion for rehearing, and, being of opinion that our original conclusion is correct, the motion is overruled. In’ our opinion we made the following statement:
“When within 40 or 50 feet of appellee, at which time the buggy had cleared the tracks by 2 or 3 feet, but while the horse was continuing to ‘cut up,’ the motorman wound up the slack in his brake chain in order to be prepared to stop his car if the horse got upon the trucks, and continued on his way.”
Counsel assert that the statement is wholly without support in the evidence. We notice this claim for the reason that it is not only our duty to state the facts as the record discloses them, but it is of much importance to' litigants who desire to review our decision, and for that reason we have again examined the evidence, and we find that appellant’s motorman testified:
“I guess I was 100 feet or further than that from the (cross) street when they drove on the track. * * * I did not put on my brake, but I taken the slack out of my brake chain when I got in about, well, 50, 40 or 50, feet * * * of appellee. I took the slack up because the horse was cutting up, to be safe if he got upon the track, so I could stop the car.”
The foregoing evidence is taken from appellant’s brief, and it will be observed that the statement made in our original opinion is precisely supported thereby.