Glasscock v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Randolph Circuit Court. Hon. J. A. Hockaday, Judge. (1) The unfenoed portion of defendant’s track where plaintiff’s animal passed upon the same and was struck, was used for switching and passing trains at Holliday station, and defendant was not required to fence at that place. Pearson v. Railroad, 33 Mo. App. 543-546; Jennings v. Railroad, 37 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Randolph Circuit Court. Hon. J. A. Hockaday, Judge. (1) The unfenoed portion of defendant’s track where plaintiff’s animal passed upon the same and was struck, was used for switching and passing trains at Holliday station, and defendant was not required to fence at that place. Pearson v. Railroad, 33 Mo. App. 543-546; Jennings v. Railroad, 37 Mo. App. 651; Cox v. Railroad, 128 Mo. 362-371. (2) The evidence was uncontradicted that the safety of employees required that the track should remain unfenced. The demurrer to the evidence should therefore have been sustained. Eor 'the…
1Opinion of the Court
ELLISON, J.-
-This is an action to recover double damages on account of defendant having killed plaintiff’s jennet by running against her at a place on defendant’s railway where it runs through uninclosed lands and where, as plaintiff charges, it was defendant’s' duty to fence. The judgment in the trial court was for plaintiff.
The accident happened inside of the switch limits at Holliday station butl outside of the corporate limits of that town. Defendant is liable to the action unless it was excused from fencing at the place of accident. Its defense is based on the idea that the whole of the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Pearson v. Chicago, Burlington & Kansas City Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Jennings v. St. Joseph & St. Louis Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1889
3Cited by2 opinions
- Hendley v. Globe Refinery Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Holland v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904