Alabama Fuel & Iron Co. v. VaughanAlabama Fuel & Iron Co. v. Vaughan
With that flooding, so far as appears, no act or agency of the defendant had anything whatever to do, and plaintiff’s case failed for want of evidence to- support it. It results that the trial judge erred in refusing to give for defendant the general affirmative charge as requested. We reached the same conclusion as to this count on a former appeal. Ala. Fuel & Iron Co. v. Vaughan,
It may be that plaintiff has a cause of action against defendant for the pollution of the stream, in violation of plaintiff’s right as a lower riparian proprietor; but the complaint does not present such a case.
We deem it unnecessary to pass upon other questions raised by the assignments of error.
Reversed and remanded.