Schindler v. Standard Oil Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis.— Hon. Thomas Bond, Judge. (1) The petition does not state facts sufficient to Econstitute a cause of action, because; (a) The question of defendant’s liability in this case is dependent upon the observance or neglect of care, (b) There is no allegation in the petition that defendant was guilty of negligence which caused or permitted the leakage, or failed to observe due care in protecting against it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis.— Hon. Thomas Bond, Judge. (1) The petition does not state facts sufficient to Econstitute a cause of action, because; (a) The question of defendant’s liability in this case is dependent upon the observance or neglect of care, (b) There is no allegation in the petition that defendant was guilty of negligence which caused or permitted the leakage, or failed to observe due care in protecting against it. McCord Rubber Co. v. St. Joseph Water Co. et al., 181 Mo. 678; Murphy v. Gillum, 73 Mo. App. 487; Cooley on Torts 2 Ed.), pag’e 676,…
1Opinion of the Court
After a verdict of a jury for plaintiff for $2500 the trial court upon considering a motion for new trial and in arrest of judgment made an order overruling the motion for a new trial, provided plaintiff would within ten days remit $1,000, otherwise the motion would be sustained on the ground of excessive verdict. A remittitur of the amount having been entered a judgment stood for $1500, from which defendant has appealed.
Plaintiff's right of recovery is founded on the following allegation in his petition:
"Plaintiff states that the defendant has and maintains a certain water pipe in the cellar…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Ball v. NyeMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1868
- McCord Rubber Co. v. St. Joseph Water Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1904
- Griffith v. LewisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1885
- Murphy v. GillumMissouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Rychlicki v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
3Cited by13 opinions
- Frank v. Environmental Sanitation Management, Inc.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1985
- Pearson v. Kansas CitySupreme Court of Missouri · 1932
- City of Richmond v. Hood Rubber Products Co.Supreme Court of Virginia · 1937
- A. J. Brown & Son, Inc. v. City of Grand RapidsMichigan Supreme Court · 1933
- Rodgers v. Kansas CityMissouri Court of Appeals · 1959
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.