JONES
v.
EAST TENNESSEE, VIRGINIA AND GEORGIA RAILROAD COMPANY
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A plaintiff brought an action for negligence against a railroad company seeking damages for personal injuries. The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, finding that the plaintiff's exception to the trial court's rulings on evidence and jury instructions was procedurally insufficient under applicable rules because it failed to properly preserve the specific errors for appellate review.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
The Chief Justice :
This was an action on the case to recover damages for injuries received through the alleged negligence of the defendant. Ten errors were assigned, two of which relate to the exclusion of evidence. As to one of these, it was properly admitted at the bar that the evidence in question was not excluded, and that so much of the record as showed the contrary was taken from the record of a former trial of the case. As to the other, no exception to the action of the court was preserved. The remaining errors assigned relate to the refusal to give certain instructions requested by plaintiff, and to parts of the charge.
The record shows' that plaintiff asked six instructions, of which the court gave two, declined to give one, and declined to give the other three except as covered by the general charge. The whole charge is contained in the bill of exceptions, which thus concludes: “ To which refusal and charge of the court and the exclusion of evidence offered, and to the action of the court in refusing a new trial, plaintiff excepted and tendered this bill of exceptions, which -was signed and sealed by the court and ordered to be made a part of the record in this cause.” This exception was insufficient.
Rule 4; Rogers v. The Marshal, 1 Wall. 644; Harvey v. Tyler, 2 Wall. 328; Insurance Co. v. Sea, 21 Wall. 158; Beaver v. Taylor, 93 U. S. 46; Block v. Darling, 140 U. S. 234, 238.
Judgment affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Allen v. United States, 4 F.2d 688 (7th Cir. 1924)…irement. In fact, it has been held that it cannot be waived. Beaver v. Taylor, 93 U. S. 46, 23 L. Ed. 797; United States v. U. S. Fidelity Co., 236 U. S. 529, 35 S. Ct. 298, 59 L. Ed. 696; Jones v. East Tenn. R. R. Co., 157 U. S. 683, 15 S. Ct. 719, 39 L. Ed. 856; Conn. Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Union Trust Co., 112 U. S. 260-261, 5 S. Ct. 119, 28 L. Ed. 708; Phœnix Assur. Co. v. Lucker, 77 F. 248, 23 C. C. A. 139; Buckeye Powder Co. v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours P. Co., 223 F. 887, 139 C. C. A. 319. We have, how…
-
Detroit Edison Co. v. Stricker, 65 F.2d 126 (6th Cir. 1933)…f the ones here taken cannot be regarded as directing the mind of the court to any specific alleged error, and do not save any questions for review. Beaver v. Taylor, 93 U. S. 46, 55, 23 L. Ed. 797; Jones v. East Tennessee, V. & G. Railroad Company, 157 U. S. 682, 15 S. Ct. 719, 39 L. Ed. 856; Guerini Stove Company v. J. P. Carlin Construction Company, 248 U. S. 334, 348, 39 S. Ct. 102, 63 L. Ed. 275; Buckeye Powder Company v. E. I. Du Pont de Nemours Powder Company, 223 F. 881 (C. C. A. 3); Sevensma v. U…1 / 2
-
Lloyd v. Thomas, 195 F.2d 486 (7th Cir. 1952)…ants cannot be regarded as directing the mind of the court to any specific alleged error. Such general objections do not save any question for review. Beaver v. Taylor, 93 U.S. 46, 23 L.Ed. 797; Jones v. East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia R. R. Co., 157 U.S. 682, 15 S.Ct. 719, 39 L.Ed. 856; Detroit Edison Co. v. Stricker, 6 Cir., 65 F. 2d 126, and Hall v. Aetna Life Insurance Co., 8 Cir., 85 F. 2d 447. We might, under the circumstances, refuse to consider the objections and exceptions of the defendants to…
Authorities Cited
- Beaver v. Taylor, 93 U.S. 46 (U.S. 1876)
- Ins. Co. v. Sea, 21 Wall. 158 (U.S. 1874)
- Block v. Darling, 140 U.S. 234 (U.S. 1891)
- Rogers v. The Marshal, 1 Wall. 644 (U.S. 1863)