State v. St. Joseph, St. Louis & Santa Fe Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Ray Circuit Court. — Hon. James M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The information does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, or to constitute any offense. R. S. 1889, sec. 2608. The statute in question requires the giving of the statutory signals, “under a penalty of §20 for every neglect of the provisions of this section, to be paid by the corporation owning the railroad.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Ray Circuit Court. — Hon. James M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) The information does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action, or to constitute any offense. R. S. 1889, sec. 2608. The statute in question requires the giving of the statutory signals, “under a penalty of §20 for every neglect of the provisions of this section, to be paid by the corporation owning the railroad.” There is no allegation that the defendant ever “owned the railroad,” which is the gist of the action so far as its liability is concerned. (2) The finding and judgment are not supported by the…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
This is an action instituted, before a justice of the peace to recover the statutory penalty of $20, under section 2608, Revised Statutes, 1889, for the alleged failure on the part of the defendant to ring the bell or sound the whistle at a public crossing. The justice of the peace before whom the case was tried rendered judgment for the plaintiff; upon appeal to the circuit court, evidence was heard by the court, a trial by jury having been waived, and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, from which the'defendant has prosecuted its appeal.
I. The first point presented for reversal is, that…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Texas Bank Trust Co. of Beaumont v. SmithTexas Supreme Court · 1917
- State ex rel. Cass County v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1907
- Great Northern Railway Co. v. OakleyWashington Supreme Court · 1925
- De Luxe Motor Cab Co. v. DeverAppellate Court of Illinois · 1929
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.