State v. Eyermann
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction.— Hon. Hiram JSf. Moore, Judge. The information charges that defendant as manager of G. Eyermann, Jr., & Brother was guilty of the offense. The proof shows that he was not manager at all, hut a partner of the firm which owns the plant. He was tried on one theory and convicted on another. There is no proof from which willfulness on the part of the defendant can he inferred.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Criminal Correction.— Hon. Hiram JSf. Moore, Judge. The information charges that defendant as manager of G. Eyermann, Jr., & Brother was guilty of the offense. The proof shows that he was not manager at all, hut a partner of the firm which owns the plant. He was tried on one theory and convicted on another. There is no proof from which willfulness on the part of the defendant can he inferred. The most that can be said is, that there was proof that the engineer on that day failed to perform his duty, and he, therefore, violated the law. State v. Baker, 71 Mo.…
1Opinion of the Court
NORTONI, -J.
(after stating the facts). — 1. The first point made by appellant is that the indictment is insufficient. The principal criticism directed against the indictment is that it charges defendant to he manager for G-. Eyermann, Jr. & Brother without alleging whether Gr. Eyermann, Jr. & Brother is a partnership or a corporation. We are not impressed with this objection. The allegation is, “said Eyermann being then and there manager of certain buildings or premises for said Gr. Eyermann, Jr., & Brother.” The clause of the statute which is pertinent, reads: “The owners, managers or agents…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- State v. HemenoverSupreme Court of Missouri · 1905
3Cited by1 opinion
- City of Monett v. HallMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907