Opinion

Bradford v. Birmingham Electric Co.

  • 227 Ala. 285
  • 149 So. 729
  • 1933 Ala. LEXIS 230
Court
Supreme Court of Alabama
Filed
Jun 8, 1933
Status
Published
Author
Knight
On the bench
Anderson, Brown, Knight, Thomas
Cited by
19 cases
Authority
More cited than 43.7%

The opinion

On Rehearing.

KNIGHT, Justice.

If it were conceded that charge 35 should have defined what constituted “due care on the occasion complained of,” yet it appears from the oral charge of the court that the court fully and correctly defined the care required by law of the defendant in the carriage of passengers, and given charge 35 should be read in connection with the court’s oral charge. This charge in no way contravened the court’s oral charge. Due care is care proportioned to any given situation, its surrounding peculiarities and hazards. It may, and often does, require extraordinary, indeed.the highest, care. Clara E. Tower v. Charles W. Camp et al., 103 Conn. 41 , 130 A. 86 .

Application overruled.

ANDERSON, C. X, and THOMAS and BROWN, JJ., concur.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.