Court Opinion

ID: 9832488
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 21:57:20.067478+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:43:47.368969
License: Public Domain

On Motion for Rehearing.
[6] After further consideration of this case, we have reached the conclusion we erred in ordering a reversal and remanding thereof for error in the charge, as we are now convinced that the instruction to the jury that Nussbaum & Scharff could not re-cpver, while technically error, could not have influenced the verdict of the jury.
The suit was instituted by Nussbaum & Scharff for the benefit of the Standard Marine Insurance Company, Limited, and the testimony showed that Nussbaum & Scharff had no interest in a recovery, but that, if a recovery was had, said insurance company would receive the proceeds. The court properly and clearly instructed the jury that the railroad company was liable for the burning of the cotton, if it negligently set it on fire, and, if so, to find a verdict for said insurance company. A recovery was based on the negligence of the railroad company, if any, and it is clearly evident that the jury predicated its verdict on the insufficiency of the evidence to show negligence in the railroad. Therefore we cannot see that injury was done by giving said charge.
The motion for rehearing is granted, and the judgment affirmed.