Sommerfield v. St. Louis Transit Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Walter B. Douglas, Judge. (1) Defendant’s objection to the introduction of any evidence under the first count of the petition should have been sustained on the ground that the cause of action therein sued on was barred by the statute of limitations. Book v. Railway, 75 Mo. App. 604; Breen v. Transit Co., 102 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. Walter B. Douglas, Judge. (1) Defendant’s objection to the introduction of any evidence under the first count of the petition should have been sustained on the ground that the cause of action therein sued on was barred by the statute of limitations. Book v. Railway, 75 Mo. App. 604; Breen v. Transit Co., 102 Mo. App. 489, 77 S. W. 78; R. S. 1899, sec. 4275. (2) But we insist that the instruction in the nature of a demurrer to the evidence as to the first count of plaintiff’s petition should have been sustained, for the further reason that there…
1Opinion of the CourtReyburn, J.
(after stating the facts). — 1. The plaintiff’s case as stated in the trial court was not for assault and battery, but for a tortious ejection or wrongful ejectment from the car upon which he was rightfully a lawful passenger. There is no declaration upon an illegal assault on or violence inflicted on plaintiff’s person, but averments of an illegal expulsion, willful and wanton, but without force, from the car upon which, by virtue of the transfer checks received from the previous conductor, and tendered to the Cass avenue conductor, plaintiff and his sister were entitled to be transported to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Hicks v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1878
- Kirby v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
- Danner v. BertholdMissouri Court of Appeals · 1882
3Cited by2 opinions
- Forrester v. Southern Pacific Co.Nevada Supreme Court · 1913
- Carmody v. St. Louis Transit Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1907