Ennis
Great Northern Ry. Co. v. Ennis
Opinion
lead Opinion
Ross, J.
(after stating the facts as above). We pass without comment the many manifestations of feeling disclosed by the transcript in this case, both on the part of counsel and the court, in the hope that we shall not see here another such record.
The issues between the parties were few and simple: Was there negligence on the part of the defendant company? If so, was it the cause of the death of Mrs. Ennis, and was there such contributory negligence on her part as precluded a recovery for damages by the plaintiffs ?
[1, 2] The testimony of Hamilton was that at the time of the accident he was not section foreman, but was at that time engaged in prospecting for gravel.
The witness George Anderson testified as follows:
The circumstances disclosed by the evidence were sufficient to justify the jury in concluding that the horse was killed by a passing train. *21 Thompson on Negligence, § 2194. And if the defendant company permitted the carcass to remain upon its right of way and emit offensive odors close to a roadway traveled by the public, there can be no doubt of its liability for damages occasioned by such nuisance. Revised Codes of Montana, §§ 6162, 6163; Wood on Nuisances (3d Ed.) §…