Phoenix Ry. Co. v. Landis,
231 U.S. 578 (1913)

Annotate this Case
  • Syllabus  | 
  • Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Phoenix Ry. Co. v. Landis, 231 U.S. 578 (1913)

Phoenix Ry. Co. v. Landis

No. 61

Argued November 12, 1913

Decided December 22, 1913

231 U.S. 578


This Court is disposed to accept the construction of local statutes by the territorial court, and therefore held that the action for death by negligence under Rev.Stats. Arizona 1901, pars. 2764-2766, was for the benefit of the estate, and that it was not necessary to allege or prove the existence of beneficiaries or amount of damages sustained by them.

Where the case was tried throughout on the proper theory of the statute, the fact that the court in its charge may have used some terms that were technically inappropriate held not to be ground for reversal, as the jury could not have been misled thereby.

This Court, in reviewing on error the judgment of the territorial court, is limited to those questions that may be appropriately raised on writ of error, which excludes an objection that the verdict is against the weight of evidence or that the damages allowed are excessive.

An instruction that the jury might consider the income and earning capacity of deceased, his business capacity, experience, health conditions, energy and perseverance during his probable expectancy of life will not he held to be too general in the absence of a suitable request of the defendant for an instruction with greater particularity.

An objection to the charge in regard to the subject of damages which was not presented to the court below comes too late when raised in this Court for the first time.

This Court will not, except in a clear case, hold that the appellate court in a territory erred in following the established practice and construction of a local statute in regard to the record in cases on appeal.

13 Ariz. 279 affirmed.

The facts, which involve the validity of a verdict and judgment for damages for negligence causing the death of the judgment creditor's intestate, are stated in the opinion.

Page 231 U. S. 579

Disclaimer: Official Supreme Court case law is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia case law is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.