Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 26

Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 26

List price: US$22.40

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

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

Try AbeBooks

Description

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. 1887 edition. Excerpt: ...has appealed. I. The first contention of defendant is, that there was not suflicient evidence to entitle plaintiff to the opinion of the jury. VVe have carefully examined the 'evidence, as presented by the appellant; and whatever may be the opinion of this court as to the weight of the evidence, we are satisfied there was ample evidence to warrant the trial court in submitting the question of negligence to the jury. They are the sole judges of the weight of evidence and the credibility of the witnesses. We discover nothing in their verdict or conduct to justify this court in disturbing their conclusion. II. On the trial of the cause, the plaintiif, against the objection of the defendant, was permitted to read in evidence an ordinance of the city of Breckinridge, prohibiting the running of railroad trains therein over a certain rate of speed. The ground of objection is, that the ordinance was not pleaded by the plaintiff. In Robertson '0. Railroad (84 Mo. 119), it was held that the cause of action, being at common law for the negligent killing of plaintiff's stock, it is not founded on such ordinance, and, therefore, it was not necessary to plead it; but if defendant was running its train in violation of it, it was competent to introduce the ordinance in evidence, in support of the charge of general negligence. To the same effect are the cases of Jfapes '0. Railroad (76 Mo. 367), and Braxton '0. Railroad (77 Mo. 455). Under these rulings, the evidence was properly admitted, as bearing on the issue of negligence. III. The defendant offered in evidence the records of the county court, for the purpose of showing that, at the time of this injury, the law was in force in that county, prohibiting stock from running at large. This...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 234 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 12mm | 426g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 123688535X
  • 9781236885357