Fath v. Tower Grove & LaFayette Railway
Supreme Court of Missouri
Certified from St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) Clause 4 of section 1246 of article 6 of the revised ordinances of 1887, of the city of St. Louis, is void in so far as it undertakes to ñx a standard of diligence or liability for negligence in civil suits at common law against street railway corporations. 39 Mo.
Read the full summary
Certified from St. Louis Court of Appeals. (1) Clause 4 of section 1246 of article 6 of the revised ordinances of 1887, of the city of St. Louis, is void in so far as it undertakes to ñx a standard of diligence or liability for negligence in civil suits at common law against street railway corporations. 39 Mo. App. 447. (2) The instructions given for plaintiff, in following the language of the city ordinance here in controversy, require a decree of diligence on the part of defendant’s servants not warranted by law. The ordinance in question among other things requires defendant’s servants in…
1Opinion of the CourtSherwood, P. J.
Action by infant, seven years of age, through next friend, for injuries received by the former, in consequence of coming in contact with one of the defendant company’s cars, which was alleged to have happened by reason of the negligence of that company, and, also, because of its negligent failure to observe the requirements of subdivision 4, of section 1246, article 6, revised ordinances, 1887, of the city of St. Louis. This was the substance of the petition. Said subdivision 4 reads as follows: “Fourth. The conductor and driver of each car shall keep a vigilant watch for all vehicles and…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Prentis v. Atlantic Coast Line Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Conrad v. . the Trustees of the Village of IthacaNew York Court of Appeals · 1857
- Willy v. . MulledyNew York Court of Appeals · 1879
- Robinson v. . ChamberlainNew York Court of Appeals · 1866
- Parker v. BarnardMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1883
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Sluder v. St. Louis Transit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1905
- Holwerson v. St. Louis & Suburban Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Chouquette v. Southern Electric RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Moran v. Pullman Palace Car Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Cleveland, Cincinnati, Chicago & St. Louis Railway Co. v. PowersIndiana Supreme Court · 1909
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.