Wadsworth v. Williams

Nov 15, 1893
Reporters:
Before:
Coleman
COLEMAN, J.

This was an action to recover damages for trespass upon lands. The assignments of error are. based upon the refusal ‍​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‍of the court to give two several charges requested in writing by the defendant. No briefs have been filed by either party. ■

The bill of exceptions is very meagre, and does not purport to set out all the evidence. When this ‍​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‍is the case this court will presume there was evidence introduced on the trial which justified the action of the court. Evansville, Paducah & Tennessee River Packet Company v. Slater, ante, p. 245, and authorities collected.

The first charge requested directed the attention of the jury to ‍​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‍a single fact. There may have been other facts in evidence, controlling or qualifying the fact thus singled out. Moreover, it is not error to refuse a charge which emphasizes and gives undue prominence to any single fact. Such charges are ‍​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‍calculated to mislead the jury, and generally are regarded as argumentative, and for this reason may be properly refused. — Bell v. Kendall & Co., 93 Ala. 489; A. G. S. R. R. Co. v. Sellers, Ib. 9 ; Jackson v. Robinson, Ib. 157; Eastis v. Montgomery, Ib. 293.

Prom all that appears in ‍​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​​​‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‍the record the second charge refused was abstract. — Bostic v. The State, 94 Ala. 45; Smith v. Collins, Ib. 394.

There is no error in the record.

Affirmed.