Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 123

Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 123

List price: US$22.39

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks


This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1907 edition. Excerpt: ...court instructed at plaintiff's instance, that if the jury believed plaintiff was the owner of the two barns and their contents, and the hog pen, and said property was destroyed by fire from one of defendant's engines, defendant was liable for the damage, regardless of whether it was negligent or not. Complaint is made of the charge as referring the jury to the petition for the issues, but it did nothing of the kind. The only reference to the petition in the instruction was in speaking of the property as that mentioned in the petition. The main issue in the case was whether or not the fire was kindled from coals from an engine, ' and this issue was carefully defined and submitted in all the instructions. In another instruction the court told the jury that if the issues were found for plaintiff, its damage should be in such sum as they believed the barns, their contents and the hog pen were reasonably worth on the night of the fire, not to exceed the sum sued for, to-wit, $6,479. This instruction is complained of because it did not set out the different items of property. The proof was conclusive that all the property sued for was destroyed and there was testimony as to the value of every portion of it. The verdict was for a round sum instead of separate values for each article, but this is no ground of objection. These instructions are almost copies of two approved by the Supreme Court in Mathews v. Railroad, and we think there is no merit in the criticism of them. The judgment is affirmed. All concur. Kansas Clty Court of Appeals, January 14, 1907. 1. FORCIBLE ENTRY AND DETAINER: Evidence: Declarations of Defendant: Character of Possession. In an action for unlawful detainer the merits of the title can in no wise more

Product details

  • Paperback | 258 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 14mm | 467g
  • English
  • Illustrations, black and white
  • 1236777948
  • 9781236777942