Larrance v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Eon. Thos. J. Sechorn, Judge. (1) The question of plaintiff’s negligence should never be submitted to the jury where there is no dispute as to the facts and where on such facts no fair difference of opinion can exist as to the presence or absence of such negligence. Beach on Contributory Negligence (2 Ed.), secs. 446, 447, 449; Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law (2 Ed.), p. 456; Glaser v. Rothschild, 120 S. W. 1-9; Kelly v. Stewart, 93 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court. — Eon. Thos. J. Sechorn, Judge. (1) The question of plaintiff’s negligence should never be submitted to the jury where there is no dispute as to the facts and where on such facts no fair difference of opinion can exist as to the presence or absence of such negligence. Beach on Contributory Negligence (2 Ed.), secs. 446, 447, 449; Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law (2 Ed.), p. 456; Glaser v. Rothschild, 120 S. W. 1-9; Kelly v. Stewart, 93 Mo. App. 47; Brown v. Railroad, 31 Mo. App. 661; Charlton v. Railroad, 200 Mo; 440; Fowler v. Randall, 99 Mo. App. 414; Nephler v.…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
Plaintiff was an assistant or helper to the mail carrier on one of defendant’s trains. He was injured, and charges it to defendant’s negligence. He obtained a verdict in the trial court which was after-wards set aside and a new trial granted. He thereupon appealed.
The new trial was granted for the reason that the trial court thought error had been committed in submitting the case to the jury on the theory that as a matter of law plaintiff had not been guilty of contributory negligence, and in refusing to submit the question of his contributory negligence.
It is undoubtedly true that' in a case…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Brown v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1888