Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 88

Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 88

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. 1901 edition. Excerpt: ...Frank v. Railroad, 57 Mo. App. 181. (3) Tl1e'plaintifl"s first instruction is erroneous in submitting to the jury for a finding, the question whether, from the time when the danger of plaintiff might have been known to defendant's agent in charge of the car, there was sufficient time to stop the car by th euse of ordinary care; whereas, there was no evidence to support plaintifl" s contention on that point. Sinclair v. Railroad, 133 Mo. 233. John E'. Bowcoclc and G. N. Fickeissen for respondent. (1) The court properly submitted the case to the jury. Plaintiff pleaded that after he had safely gotten on the track of defendant, defendant, by keeping the watch required and by stopping the car as soon as danger to plaintiif was apparent, could have avoided the collision. Plaintiff proved the ordinance, its acceptance, and the negligence on part of defendant, as well as the failure of defendant to give plaintiff any warning of their approach. Klockenbrink v. Railroad, 81 Mo. App. 351; McAndrews v. Railroad, 83 Mo. App. 233; Chamberlain v. Railroad, 133 Mo. 587; Reardon v. Railroad, 114 Mo. 406. (2) The negligence, if any, of plaintiff in not looking back for approaching cars after he had driven on the track at such a distance ahead of the car that the motorman, by ordinary care, could have stopped the car after he discovered the plaintiff in a position of danger, was not the proximate cause of the collision. McAndrews v. Railroad, 83 Mo. App. 233. (3) Plaintiif's first instruction correctly stated the law. The averment in the petition that plaintiff was without fault, placed him in no worse position than defendant's plea of contributory negligence. Hudson v. Railroad, 101 Mo. 13. GOQDE, J.--The general...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 232 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 12mm | 422g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236910680
  • 9781236910684