Brauer v. English
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Cape Girardeau County Circuit Court, J. D. Foster, Judge. The defendant may show any circumstance in mitigation of the injury done by his trespass ; and the defendant having shot the plaintiff’s dog while he was ..worrying the defendant’s sheep, this fact, and the habits of the animal, are admissible in evidence for the defendant in the estimation of damages. 2 Greenleaf on Evid.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Cape Girardeau County Circuit Court, J. D. Foster, Judge. The defendant may show any circumstance in mitigation of the injury done by his trespass ; and the defendant having shot the plaintiff’s dog while he was ..worrying the defendant’s sheep, this fact, and the habits of the animal, are admissible in evidence for the defendant in the estimation of damages. 2 Greenleaf on Evid. (2 Ed.) p. 278, sect. 273 ; Wells v.^'Head, 4 C. and P. 568; Brown v. JEToburgee, 52 Barb. 15; King v. Kline, 6 Barr, 318; Woolf v. Ohalker, 31 Conn. 121. Waterman on Trespass, sects. 906, 907, and…
1Opinion of the CourtLewis, P. J.
The plaintiff, Martha J. Brauer (with whom her husband is joined as a co-plaintiff), sued before a justice of the peace for the wrongful and malicious killing of her dog, claiming damages in the sum of fifty. dollars. On an appeal to the circuit court, a jury gave her a verdict lor the amount claimed.
*491The defence was, that the dog had been killing some-of the defendant’s sheep, and was in the act of worrying others when shot by the defendant. The following question, put to the defendant as a witness, was, on the-plaintiff’s objection, excluded for irrelevancy and incompetency: “State what this…
2Cited by3 opinions
- State v. SylvesterSupreme Court of Vermont · 1941
- Skog v. KingWisconsin Supreme Court · 1934
- Woolsey v. HaasMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896