Turner v. Haar
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court.—Hon. J. H. Slover, Judge. (1) To establish her case it was necessary for the plaintiff affirmatively to prove that the building was not “strong enough to withstand the ordinary storms common to the locality” and that defendants knew or by the exercise of ordinary care might have known this fact in time to Lave warned the plaintiff.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Jackson Circuit Court.—Hon. J. H. Slover, Judge. (1) To establish her case it was necessary for the plaintiff affirmatively to prove that the building was not “strong enough to withstand the ordinary storms common to the locality” and that defendants knew or by the exercise of ordinary care might have known this fact in time to Lave warned the plaintiff. There can be no doubt of this proposition of law, and the court in instruction numbered 3 for the defendant so declared. Stoker v. Railroad, 91 Mo. 509; McPherson v. Railroad, 97 Mo; 253; Flori v.- St. Louis, 69 Mo. 341; Railroad…
1Opinion of the CourtMaceaulane, J.
The suit is to recover damages for personal injuries received by plaintiff, by reason of the fall of a building, in which she was employed by defendants to work; caused, as alleged, by its defective construction and improper use.
The petition charged that defendants were lessees and occupants of a four story brick building in Kansas City, in the second, third and fourth stories of which they were carrying on the business of manufacturers of overalls and pants; that on the eleventh of May, 1886, plaintiff Was, and for a long time prior thereto *341had been, with others, employed by defendants in…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Railroad Co. v. ReevesSupreme Court of the United States · 1870
- McPherson v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Senn v. Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Flori v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Stoher v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1891
3Cited by37 opinions
- Fitzpatrick v. PenfieldSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1920
- American Brewing Ass'n v. TalbotSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Newcomb v. New York Central & Hudson River RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Payne v. De VaughnCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1926
- Klebe v. Parker Distilling Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1907
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.