78 Miss. 182 | Miss. | 1900
delivered the opinion of the court.
It is perfectly clear that the verdict is excessive. ■ Granting that, on Murray’s testimony, all else can be upheld — which we do not now decide. Murray expressly states that he knew nothing of his own knowledge, or from his books, as to any death or injury of or to any animals in cars No. 10536, N. E.; 25067, V., S. & P.; 5029, V., S. & P.; 35040, M. & O., and 8003, A. G: S., and yet the jury rendered a verdict for the whole amount claimed. It cannot be upheld on the plaintiff’s very unsatisfactory testimony, as contained in this record, and on Murray’s it is excessive.
We decline to pass upon the competency of the testimony of Coleman, based on memoranda or statements, whatever they were, which Coleman was allowed to use to refresh his memory. If they were memoranda — the ones he testified from—
The law is thoroughly settled on this point. But in this case it is absolutely impossible, from the very irregular course of the examination, to tell what these memoranda were, or when
Reversed and remanded.