Elliott v. Western Union Telegraph Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Audrain Circuit Court.- — Hon. James D. Barnett, Judge. (1) Plaintiff’s petition is not sufficient, and defendant’s objection to the introduction of any evidence should have been sustained.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Audrain Circuit Court.- — Hon. James D. Barnett, Judge. (1) Plaintiff’s petition is not sufficient, and defendant’s objection to the introduction of any evidence should have been sustained. The statute (section 3330), making telegraph companies liable for a penalty for failure to transmit messages must be strictly construed and applied only to such cases as come clearly within its provisions, and in actions under such statute, it is especially necessary that the petition should state facts which make the defendant liable under the statute by its very terms. Every essential fact to…
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, P. J.
This is an action under section 3330, Revised Statutes 1909,. to recover the statutory penalty of $300, two-thirds of which, under this statute, to be retained by the plaintiff and one-third to be paid into the county school fund of the county in which the suit is instituted. After averring the incorporation and business of the defendants as a telegraph company engaged in operating lines in the State of Missouri and between the cities of St. Louis and Mexico in that State,' it is averred that on the 27th of June, 1911, plaintiff addressed a written telegram to Dan H. Cauthorne at Mexico,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Bradshaw v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Grant v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Paul v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1912
3Cited by2 opinions
- F. W. Brockman Commission Co. v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Held v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1915