Bruce v. United Railways Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. William M. Kinsey, Judge. The trial court erred in giving respondent’s third instruction: This instruction authorized the jury to find for the respondent if they found appellant violated the speed ordinance.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Eon. William M. Kinsey, Judge. The trial court erred in giving respondent’s third instruction: This instruction authorized the jury to find for the respondent if they found appellant violated the speed ordinance. As the plaintiff in her testimony admits stepping from behind the west bound car immediately in front of the approaching east bound car before her vision was at all unobstructed, she was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. Hence no question, of appellant’s primary negligence should go to the jury. Paul v. United Railways…
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, P. J.
This is an action by plaintiff, respondent here, to recover damages for injuries al*95leged to have been sustained by her in consequence of having been struck by a car operated by defendant along its line of railway in the city of St. Louis. The accident is the same as that involved in Bruce v. United Railways Co., 175 Mo. App. 568, 158 S. W. 102, that being by the husband for injuries to the wife, the present by the wife in her own name and in her own right for injuries sustained by her. Necessarily this plaintiff was not allowed to testify in behalf of her husband in that case. Now we have her…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bruce v. United Railways Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913
3Cited by2 opinions
- Quinley v. Springfield Traction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- State Ex Rel. City of St. Louis v. PriestSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941