Churchman v. Kansas City
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Clay Circuit Cowrt. — Hon. James M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) To allow the introduction of ordinance number 40147 over the objection of defendant’s counsel, was error. (2) It is well-settled law in this state that it is not incumbent upon defendant in cases of this kind to show that plaintiff was guilty of negligence, if plaintiff’s own evidence shows that he was guilty of contributory negligence. Nichols v. Winfrey, 79 Mo. 544, 551; Taylor v. Railroad, 26 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Clay Circuit Cowrt. — Hon. James M. Sandusky, Judge. (1) To allow the introduction of ordinance number 40147 over the objection of defendant’s counsel, was error. (2) It is well-settled law in this state that it is not incumbent upon defendant in cases of this kind to show that plaintiff was guilty of negligence, if plaintiff’s own evidence shows that he was guilty of contributory negligence. Nichols v. Winfrey, 79 Mo. 544, 551; Taylor v. Railroad, 26 Mo. App. 336; Brown v. Railroad, 31 Mo. .App. 661; Milburn v. Railroad, 86 Mo. 104. The instruction was, to say the least,…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
This case was here on a former' occasion, and is reported in 44 Mo. App. 665, where there will be found a statement of all the facts which are necessary to a proper understanding of the questions arising on the present appeal. When the case was here before, the judgment, which was for plaintiff, was reversed and the cause remanded. It appears there has been a second trial wherein the plaintiff has been successful. The defendant again appeals.
I. The first ground of the defendant’s appeal is that the trial court erred in permitting the plaintiff to introduce city ordinance number 40147. The…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Buesching v. St. Louis Gaslight Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Parsons v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Huckshold v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- O'Connor v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Stephens v. City of MaconSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Crenshaw v. Pacific Mutual Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Klusman v. HarperMissouri Court of Appeals · 1927
- Ewart v. Kate Tootle & Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1892