Marion v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from New Madrid Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. (1) This suit was brought in the circuit court,, and not before a justice of the peace, under the. Double Damage Statute, which is a penal statute". R. S. 1899, sec. 1105; Barnett v. Railroad, 68 Mo. 56. The statute defines what a lawful fence shall be.
Read the full summary
Appeal from New Madrid Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. (1) This suit was brought in the circuit court,, and not before a justice of the peace, under the. Double Damage Statute, which is a penal statute". R. S. 1899, sec. 1105; Barnett v. Railroad, 68 Mo. 56. The statute defines what a lawful fence shall be. R. S. 1899, sec. 3295. In a case of this nature it has been held that the court should instruct the jury, and not leave them to grope their way unaided through the testimony in order to determine what they should take into consideration in making up their verdict. Rains v.…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
(after stating the facts.) — 1. Defendants contend that the court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the theory of plaintiff’s case, and on what ground he was entitled to recover. Section 748, Revised Statutes 1899, provides: “When the evidence is concluded, and before the case is argued or submitted, . . . . either party may move the court to give instructions on any point of law arising in the cause, which shall be in writing and shall be given or refused. The court may of its own motion give like instructions,” etc. In Eagle Construction Company v. Railroad, 71 Mo. App. 626, the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Browning v. Wabash Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Nolan v. JohnsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Coleman v. DraneSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Eagle Construction Co. v. Wabash RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Hurst v. Scammon, Bailey & Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1895
3Cited by1 opinion
- Gee v. ShermanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1927