Crumpley v. Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Nodaway Circuit Court. — Hon. C. A. 'Anthony, Judge. (1) The demurrer to the evidence under the first count should have been sustained. It was the duty of Samuel Crumpley in approaching the crossing to exercise the degree of care commensurate with the danger to be apprehended there, and he should have approached the crossing under the apprehension that a train might be expected at any moment.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Nodaway Circuit Court. — Hon. C. A. 'Anthony, Judge. (1) The demurrer to the evidence under the first count should have been sustained. It was the duty of Samuel Crumpley in approaching the crossing to exercise the degree of care commensurate with the danger to be apprehended there, and he should have approached the crossing under the apprehension that a train might be expected at any moment. He was familiar with' the wagon road crossing, and he knew that the regular train was due and had not gone by. If the view of the train from the highway was ■obstructed, this should only have…
1Opinion of the CourtThomas, J.
This action was brought to recover the statutory penalty of $5,000 for the death of the plaintiff’s husband, caused, as she alleges in her petition, by the negligence of the operatives of a train of the defendant in failing to give the signal of bell or whistle as it approached the crossing where he was killed. This is the second appeal. The judgment was reversed on a former appeal for reasons given in the opinion of this court reported in 98 Mo. 34. On the second trial the verdict was for plaintiff on the issue of the failure to ring the bell or sound the whistle alone, and, hence, the issue…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Buesching v. St. Louis Gaslight Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Parsons v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Petty v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1885
- Kenney v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- Huckshold v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1886
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Provident Life & Accident Ins. v. PrietoTennessee Supreme Court · 1935
- Meadows v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
- Weller v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Starr v. Aetna Life InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1905
- Wells Fargo & Co. v. BenjaminCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1914
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.