Lampe v. United Railways Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.—Hon. Daniel D. Fisher, Judge. . . It is reversible error for tbe trial judge to refuse tbe attorney of a litigant permission to see instructions before they have been given. Harding v. Railroad, 232 Mo. 444. A general exception to the instructions of the adverse party is all that is necessary to permit of their review by the appellate court. Harding v. Railroad, 232 Mo. 457.
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
This is a suit for damages accrued to plaintiff through an alleged unlawful assault upon him by defendant’s conductor. The finding and judgment were for defendant and plaintiff prosecutes the appeal.
Plaintiff is a minor, aged about seventeen years, and prosecutes the suit by his next friend duly appointed. Defendant is a common carrier of passengers, in the city of St. Louis, and as such operates a line of street cars on Broadway. The evidence for plaintiff tends to prove that he boarded one of defendant’s cars on Broadway, about seven o’clock in the evening, with the intention to become a…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Browning v. Wabash Western Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Morgan v. MulhallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1908
- Ala. G. S. Railroad v. ArnoldSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
- Kenny v. Inhabitants of IpswichMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1901
- Harding v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1911
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- McDonald v. PlasMissouri Court of Appeals · 1966
- Lampe v. United Railways Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1920