Bridges v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Cooper Circuit Court. — No». William N. Martin, Judge. (1) Under the law of this State passing tracks must he fenced. “But the clear implication from the opinions is that tracks are imperatively required to be fenced whenever a road runs through unenclosed lands, and that loading or passing switches located away from stations must be enclosed as well as other parts of the roads,” Smith v. Railroad, 111 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cooper Circuit Court. — No». William N. Martin, Judge. (1) Under the law of this State passing tracks must he fenced. “But the clear implication from the opinions is that tracks are imperatively required to be fenced whenever a road runs through unenclosed lands, and that loading or passing switches located away from stations must be enclosed as well as other parts of the roads,” Smith v. Railroad, 111 Mo. App. 421. (1) A railroad company is not required tó fence its track at a place where to do so would endanger the lives.and persons of its employees engaged in operating its…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
Plaintiff had two animals so badly-injured by one of defendant’s trains as to be worthless. They were afterwards killed. The trial court rendered judgment for the defendant. A finding of facts was made, in which, after finding the value of the animals, the court proceeded as follows:
“The court further finds from the evidence that the point of the railroad track of the defendant at which said animals went upon said track was not enclosed by a fence, and was at a point where said railroad track passes through and along unenclosed lands, and that said point was at least 1,700 feet east of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railway Co. v. ClarkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Morris v. Louis, Kansas City & Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1874
- Pearson v. Chicago, Burlington & Kansas City Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Gilpin v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Russell v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Schoonover v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1921
- Green v. Kansas City Southern Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Corcoran v. Wabash RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Whiteman v. A. T. & S. F. Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1912
- Bridges v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911