[DOWNLOAD] "Thompson v. Yellowstone Livestock" by Supreme Court of Montana # Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Thompson v. Yellowstone Livestock
- Author : Supreme Court of Montana
- Release Date : January 11, 1958
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 72 KB
Description
ANIMALS ? TRIAL ? NEGLIGENCE ? DAMAGES. 1. Pleading ? Allegations not subject to motion to strike. In action for injuries sustained when an unruly cow struck the plaintiff at the defendants livestock market, allegations respecting maintenance of a barrier fence were not subject to motion to strike as conclusions of law, redundant and surplusage, in view of other allegations. 2. Animals ? Complaint stated cause of action. Complaint stated a cause of action where allegations established the existence of a legal duty by defendant to plaintiff, a failure to perform it, and damages proximately resulting to the plaintiff from such failure. 3. Trial ? Viewing evidence on motion for non-suit. On a motion for non-suit, the evidence must be accepted and taken most favorably to the plaintiff, and even doubtful inferences and deductions must be resolved favorably toward the plaintiff. 4. Animals ? Evidence of negligence properly submitted. Evidence of defendants negligence was properly submitted to the jury. 5. Trial ? Motion for exclusion of witnesses. Matter of granting a motion to have witnesses excluded from courtroom during the trial is wholly in discretion of the trial court, and the court, having made such an order, may at any time during trial, for good cause shown, annul the order. 6. Trial ? No abuse of discretion in allowing witness to testify. In action for injuries, where rule of exclusion of witnesses had been invoked, and the witness had been present in court throughout the trial and the witness had not been subpoenaed and was not aware that he was to testify, trial court properly exercised its discretion in allowing the witness to testify in rebuttal where neither plaintiff nor his counsel were at fault, because the witness was present in the courtroom during the trial. 7. Animals ? Refusal of instruction as to definition of "fence" proper. Refusal of an instruction containing a definition of a legal fence was not error since it was inapplicable and would only tend to confuse the jury. - Page 404