Douglass v. Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. James M., Sandusky, Judge. There was no proof of any negligence which-occasioned the delay complained of. The plaintiff charged in his petition, “that said defendant negligently and carelessly failed and refused to deliver said cattle on the morning” market. If the delay was occasioned by negligence, it devolved upon the plain-, tiff to introduce some proof of the fact.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. James M., Sandusky, Judge. There was no proof of any negligence which-occasioned the delay complained of. The plaintiff charged in his petition, “that said defendant negligently and carelessly failed and refused to deliver said cattle on the morning” market. If the delay was occasioned by negligence, it devolved upon the plain-, tiff to introduce some proof of the fact. The maxim “Res ipsa loquitur” has no application to the-facts in this ease. The failure to arrive in time for the morning market was due to the fact that the train had-to be…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
— This action is in two counts. The first is-for the damages occasioned by delay in carrying six carloads of beef cattle, shipped September 18, 1889, over the defendant’s road from Lathrop, Missouri, to Chicago, Illinois, whereby it was claimed the cattle shrunk in weight and the market price thereof declined on account of the delay in getting them into the Chicago-market; and the second is a like complaint by reason of a shipment!January 14, 1890, of five cailoads of' cattle from St. Joseph, Missouri, to Chicago.
At the close of the evidence defendant asked an instruction in the nature of a…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Wernick v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Bennett v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Perry v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1901