Rees v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Montgomery 'Circuit Court.—Hon. James D. Barnett, Judge. The court erred in sustaining plaintiff’s motion’ for a new trial, (a) But one ground was assigned by the trial court for sustaining plaintiff’s motion for new trial. The grounds not mentioned are deemed to have been overruled. Connally v. Pehle, 105 Mo. App. 407; Dale & Bennett v. Mining Co., 110 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Montgomery 'Circuit Court.—Hon. James D. Barnett, Judge. The court erred in sustaining plaintiff’s motion’ for a new trial, (a) But one ground was assigned by the trial court for sustaining plaintiff’s motion for new trial. The grounds not mentioned are deemed to have been overruled. Connally v. Pehle, 105 Mo. App. 407; Dale & Bennett v. Mining Co., 110 Mo. App. 317; Crawford v. Stock Yards Co., 215 Mo. 402. (b) The motion for new trial should have been supported by the affidavit of plaintiff himself and by Mr. Barker, one of his counsel, instead of being supported only by the…
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
This is a suit for damages accrued to plaintiff on account of an alleged wrongful ejection from a passenger train. Plaintiff recovered a verdict of $5.71 but the court subsequently set it aside.on his motion and defendants prosecute the appeal from that order. The case proceeds against defendants St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad Company and the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad Company jointly on the theory that the obligation of each was breached by the ejection of plaintiff, who, at the time, was a passenger on the St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad in Kansas.
■ It appears plaintiff…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. MarshallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1865
- Easley v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- State v. WardSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- State v. WatersSupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- Boteler v. RoyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. HuntSupreme Court of Kansas · 1967
- Osborne v. Mollman Water Conditioning, Inc.Court of Civil Appeals of Oklahoma · 2002
- State v. HuxollMissouri Court of Appeals · 1915