Rose v. McCook
Missouri Court of Appeals
■ Appeal from the Carroll Circuit Court. — Hon. W. W. Ruoker, Judge. (1) The court obviously erred in giving instruction number 2 at the request of the plaintiff. The instruction is erroneous for the reason that it failed to inform the jury of the proper elements of compensation within the meaning of the law.
Read the full summary
■ Appeal from the Carroll Circuit Court. — Hon. W. W. Ruoker, Judge. (1) The court obviously erred in giving instruction number 2 at the request of the plaintiff. The instruction is erroneous for the reason that it failed to inform the jury of the proper elements of compensation within the meaning of the law. What are the elements of damage is a question of law for the court and it is the duty of the court when it undertakes to instruct on the measure of damages to instruct correctly and to state to the jury that certain elements of damage may enter into their verdict. Hawes v. Stock Yards…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
Plaintiff was injured by defendants7 cars at a railroad crossing near Carrollton and having brought this action on account thereof obtained judgment for.$1,000.
Statement. The evidence for plaintiff tended to show that she, her husband, son and a driver were in a double seated carriage, going into Carrollton, when they , n , , . approached the defendants7 track at a point where the surroundings were as follows:
There is a gradual ascent from Carrollton to some distance beyond the crossing in question, or as is commonly called an up-grade. On the south side of the railroad are two public…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Browning v. Wabash Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Fry v. Dubuque & Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1877
- Haymaker & Crookshanks v. Adams & SonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1895
- State v. DoyleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- McCarroll v. Kansas CityMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896
3Cited by1 opinion
- Quick v. WilliamsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1925