Spooner v. St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from, the New Madrid Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. If the undisputed proof shows that the point where the mare was struck and killed was outside of the city limits and switch limits, yet where the company could not have fenced without endangering the lives of its employees, or materially interfering with its business, then, in the absence of a showing of negligence, the plaintiff could not recover, and the court was entirely right in peremptorily…
Read the full summary
Appeal from, the New Madrid Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry C. Riley, Judge. If the undisputed proof shows that the point where the mare was struck and killed was outside of the city limits and switch limits, yet where the company could not have fenced without endangering the lives of its employees, or materially interfering with its business, then, in the absence of a showing of negligence, the plaintiff could not recover, and the court was entirely right in peremptorily instructing the jury to find the issues for the defendant. Pearson v. Railroad, 33 Mo. App. 543; Lloyd v. Railroad, 49 Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtBond, J.
This action is on three counts for the killing of plaintiff’s mare on the defendant railroad. It was begun before a justice, appealed to the circuit court, and by change of venue taken to the circuit court of New Madrid county, where the court, after the submission of all the evidence, directed a verdict for defendant, from which plaintiff appeals and assigns such direction as error.
Appellant insists that there is some conflict in the evidence as to the necessity for leaving the defendant’s track unfenced at the place of the accident. This point is untenable. From the end of the switch…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Crenshaw v. St. Louis, Keokuk & Northwestern Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1893