Warren v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. A. D. Burnes, Judge. The plaintiff assumed the risk of a collision of the handcar and the regular passenger train, and he was negligent in being upon and running the handcar down the grade and around the curve at a rapid speed, and there was no negligence on the part of the defendant. The demurrers .to the evidence should have been sustained.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court. — Hon. A. D. Burnes, Judge. The plaintiff assumed the risk of a collision of the handcar and the regular passenger train, and he was negligent in being upon and running the handcar down the grade and around the curve at a rapid speed, and there was no negligence on the part of the defendant. The demurrers .to the evidence should have been sustained. Hammond v. Railway, 83 M’ich. 334; Railway v. Baugh, 149 U. S. 368; Minnier v. Railway, 167 Mo. 99; Cothron v. Cudahy, 98 Mo. App. 343; Kleine v. Freunds, 91 Mo. App. 102; Harrington y. Railroad, 104 Mo. App.…
1Opinion of the Court
BROÁDDUS, P. J.
— The plaintiff seeks to reeover damages as a result of an injury caused by the alleged negligence of the defendant while he was in its employ. The answer is a general denial and that plaintiff’s injuries, if any, were the result of his own negligence. The Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Company was also made a party defendant.
The facts are as follows: On the 11th day of November, 1902, the plaintiff was in the employ of the defendant, the Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Company, as one of an extra gang of track and bridge repairers, .under its foreman, John…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Northern Pacific Railroad v. MaresSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
- Hamman v. Central Coal & Coke Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1900
- Fugler v. BotheSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Minnier v. Sedalia, Warsaw & Southwestern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Francis v. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1895
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Holman v. E. E. Souther Iron Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Barrett v. Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909