142 Ky. 263 | Ky. Ct. App. | 1911
Opinion of the Court by
Affirming. ’
Edward Hart was killed by the alleged negligence of the city of Louisville and appellee; an action was instituted for the recovery of damages and a jury was impaneled to try the case. After appellant’s counsel made a statement of the case, the court entered the following order:
“At the conclusion of the plaintiff’s opening statement to the jury the defendant Louisville Railway Co. moved the court to dismiss the petition herein as to it to which the plaintiff objected.
“The court being advised, ordered said motion be and is sustained to which plaintiff excepts.”
There was no bill of exceptions tendered or filed and we, therefore, have no means of knowing what was contained in the statement of counsel for appellant, or of ascertaining in any particular the reason for the court’s action. It appears that, appellee filed an answer to the petition of appellant by the first paragraph of which it controverted the allegations of the petition; that by the second it pleaded contributory negligence on the part of Edward Hart, and that by the third it set forth a settle
For these reasons, the judgment of the lower court is • affirmed.