119 Ga. 331 | Ga. | 1904
When this case was here before, this court decided that the positive and uncontradicted evidence of the servants of the company overcame the presumption of negligence, and that the plaintiff could not recover. On the second trial the evidence was the same, except that the plaintifl introduced expert witnesses who testified that in their opinion the train could have been stopped in a shorter distance than the engineer stated. Under the ruling in the case of Central of Ga. Ry. Co. v. Waxelbaum, 111 Ga. 812, this expert evidence did not impeach or contradict the fact testified to by the engineer, that he used all the means at his command (stating what he had done), and that he could not stop the train before running over the animal. This is especially so when the experts testified that they would take his testimony as