Scott v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Pettis Circuit Court.- — ITon. Richard Field, Judge. (1) The demurrer should have been sustained. The1 petition does not state a cause of action: First. There is no allegation in the petition that plaintiff is entitled to the penalty sued for. This is a necessary allegation. Vandeventer v. Vancourt, 1 Pennington [2 N. J.] 168. Second.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Pettis Circuit Court.- — ITon. Richard Field, Judge. (1) The demurrer should have been sustained. The1 petition does not state a cause of action: First. There is no allegation in the petition that plaintiff is entitled to the penalty sued for. This is a necessary allegation. Vandeventer v. Vancourt, 1 Pennington [2 N. J.] 168. Second. The statute under which the action is brought is a penal statute, and, in such actions, greater strictness of construction, both as to the allegata and the probata, is required. Many v. Railroad, 87 Mo. 278 on 281, and authorities cited; Barnett…
1Opinion
*530ON MOTION POR REHEARING.
The learned counsel for the respondent insists that onr decision is in direct conflict with the provisions of the act of March 21,1883 (Sess. Acts, 1883, p. 60), for the reason that the legislature enacted that section 810, chapter 21, article 2, Revised Statutes, be amended, by adding to said section these words: “And it shall be the duty of every corporation * * * to cause to be mowed down and cleaned up all vegetation whatever, twice in every year * * * between the twenty-fifth day of June and the tenth day of July, and between the fifth and fifteenth of August in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. ChambersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Morrison v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- State v. ThrustonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887