Keeton v. St. Louis & Meramec River Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Eon. Moses N. Sale, Judge. The trial court erred in allowing to amend. The power to amend by interlineation is a limited power, and not equivalent to the general power to amend after sustaining a demurrer. Defendant claims that plaintiff invoked the law of amendment by interlineation, and not the law governing amendments generally by filing a new petition.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.— Eon. Moses N. Sale, Judge. The trial court erred in allowing to amend. The power to amend by interlineation is a limited power, and not equivalent to the general power to amend after sustaining a demurrer. Defendant claims that plaintiff invoked the law of amendment by interlineation, and not the law governing amendments generally by filing a new petition. A petition which stated no cause of action did not give jurisdiction to the trial court to force a trial thereon. Nor did it give juisdiction to the trial court to allow a new suit by…
1Opinion of the CourtGoode, J.
(after stating the facts.) — The petition is said to state no cause of action because it does not characterize the alleged culpable acts of the defendant as either negligent or willful. This omission .is ar*287gued to prevent the pleading from stating a case for either a negligent or willful tort. It is true that until the petition was amended, the acts of the defendant were not denounced by the epithet “negligent;” but the stated facts constituted a breach of the defendant’s duty to Mrs. Keeton, which breach resulted in damage; and the petition imports a want of ordinary care on the part of the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. WoodIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- Louisville, New Albany & Chicago Railway Co. v. ThompsonIndiana Supreme Court · 1886
- Clark v. DyerTexas Supreme Court · 1891
- Bohr v. NeuenschwanderIndiana Supreme Court · 1889
- Dyer v. Pacific RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1863
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Peterson v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Edge v. Southwest Missouri Electric Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1907
- Norman v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of AmericaMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
- Rawson v. Kansas City Elevated Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908
- Hurley v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1913