Reports of Cases Determined by the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri Volume 46

Reports of Cases Determined by the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri Volume 46

By (author) 

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. 1871 edition. Excerpt: ...of the appellant from such facts, and the respondent was entitled to recover, unless they also believed from the evidence that there was negligence on his part that contributed directly to produce the injury. The appellant asked five instructions. The court gave the second and fifth, and refused the first, third, and fourth. The second instruction given at the instance of the appellant explicitly stated that although the jury might believe from the evidence that appellant or its agents committed the injury sued for in consequence 'of negligence on their part, yet unless they further found from the evidence that respondent used such care to avoid the injury as a man of ordinary prudence would have used under similar circumstances, they should find for the appellant, unless they should find that the injury was willfully done. The fifth instruction declared that, as to what was negligence in the respondent, the jury were to consider and judge from all the circumstances in the case whether a man having charge of a team of horses, and who was about to cross a railroad crossing in the night, above the level of the road he was crossing, where his view of the track and a coming train was intercepted until he got upon the crossing, was not in duty bound to stop and listen, and look up and down the track in both directions before he ventured thereon; and that if they believed the respondent failed to do so, and that if he had done so he t Tabor v. Missouri Valley RR. C0. could have seen or heard the train coming in time to have' j avoided the accident, then the jury should find there was neg ligence on his part; and if there was any negligence or want of care or common prudence on his part which produced or contributed to produce or occasion...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 240 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 13mm | 435g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236901029
  • 9781236901026