Gardner v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Franklin Circuit Court. — Hon. B. 8. Byors, Judge. (1) It was the duty of the conductor to obey and follow tbe rules of the appellant and to observe the terms and conditions of the freight-train permit presented to him by the respondent. He could not be required to disobey or ignore any of them on the oral statement of the respondent.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Franklin Circuit Court. — Hon. B. 8. Byors, Judge. (1) It was the duty of the conductor to obey and follow tbe rules of the appellant and to observe the terms and conditions of the freight-train permit presented to him by the respondent. He could not be required to disobey or ignore any of them on the oral statement of the respondent. Sire v. Railway, 115 Mo. 127, 21 S. W. 905; Thomas v. Railway, 72 Mich. 355. (2) As the respondent did not present to the conductor of the train from which the former was ejected, transportation or evidence of his right to he carried thereon,…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
(after stating the facts).
1. The contention of defendant is that if plaintiff has any cause of action, it is based upon the failure of the railroad company or its agent to sell or furnish him a ticket and *145certificate and not on the fact that lie was put off the train by tbe conductor for tbe reason he had no ticket. It is well-settled law that a railroad company, being a carrier of both freight and passengers, may use separate trains for freight and for passengers and may exclude freight from one and passengers from the other. [Whitehead v. Railway, 99 Mo. 1. c. 268, 11 S. W. 751; Farber v.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Olive v. StateNebraska Supreme Court · 1881
- Farber v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Chicago & Alton Railroad v. FlaggIllinois Supreme Court · 1867
- Arnold v. Illinois Central RailroadIllinois Supreme Court · 1876
- City of De Soto v. American Guaranty Fund Mutual Fire InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1903
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Anderson v. International Harvester Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1908
- Summers v. KellerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Cathey v. St. Louis & San Francisco RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
- Harkless v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910