Citation Numbers: 112 Ala. 533
Judges: Head
Filed Date: 11/15/1895
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 7/19/2022
In Central Railroad & Banking Co. v. Ingram, 98 Ala. 395, following the former cases of M. & C. R. R. Co. v. Lyon, 62 Ala. 71, and A. G. S. R. R. Co. v.
We think, however, that the first oral instruction of the court to which exception was reserved, while hypothesizing facts which constitute negligence within the rule of Ingram’s Case, was faulty in ignoring all causal relation between such negligence and the injury. If that negligence did not cause the injury, plaintiff, of course, could not recover on account of it. The instruction should have submitted that question to the jury.
The second and third oral instructions were free from error.
For the error in giving the first oral instruction, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
Reversed and remanded.