Legal Opinion

Warrington v. Bird

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 3, 1912PublishedCited by 2 opinions

Appeal from. St. Louis- City Circuit Court.— Eon. George H. Shields, Judge. (1) An instruction so worded that its language may reasonably be interpreted as assuming certain controverted facts to be true is erroneous. Fullerton v. Fordyce, 121 Mo. 13; Linn v. Bridge Co., 78- Mo. App. 111. (2) An. instruction which directs a verdict on the whole case must contain all of the facts essential to the cause of action. Boegeli v. Marble Co., 49 Mo. A]3p. 643; Carder v. Primm, 60 Mo.

Read the full summary

1Opinion of the CourtNoetoni, J.

This is a suit for damages accrued to plaintiff through the alleged negligence of defendant. Plaintiff recovered and defendant prosecutes the appeal.

It appears plaintiff was driving in a buggy north on Garrison avenue in the city of St. Louis when an automobile, at the crossing on Locust street, collided with his horse and inflicted serious injuries thereto. The buggy was slightly injured as well. The driver of the automobile did not. hesitate, but went on with increased speed, supposedly for the purpose of concealing the identity of himself and the ownership of the machine. There is no…

2Cases cited2 opinions

Fullerton v. FordyceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
Linn v. Massillon Bridge Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1899

3Cited by2 opinions

Di Sandro v. Providence Gas Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1918
Bell v. United Railways Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1914