Cramer v. Springfield Traction Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court. — Hon. James T. Ne-ville, Judge. (1) The petition charges that the motorman negligently and wilfully started the car1 with a sudden jerk while plaintiff was in the act of alighting. To use the language of Judge Sherwood, “The petition on its face is a felo de se.” Earning y.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Greene Circuit Court. — Hon. James T. Ne-ville, Judge. (1) The petition charges that the motorman negligently and wilfully started the car1 with a sudden jerk while plaintiff was in the act of alighting. To use the language of Judge Sherwood, “The petition on its face is a felo de se.” Earning y. Eailway, 157 Mo. 507, 57 S. W. 268. (2) If the term wilfully is rejected, then the liability of defendant can be predicated only upon one of two theories: First, that the car stopped either at a regular stopping place and did not wait a reasonable time to permit all passengers for said…
1Opinion of the CourtBland, P. J.
(after stating the facts). —1. Defendant malíes the point, that the facts stated in the petition are repugnant and if the word ‘willfully’ is to' be rejected, in passing upon the sufficiency of the petition to support the judgment, then there is no issue of negligence pleaded. A petition alleging both willfulness and negligence as grounds for recovery, in Raming v. Railway, 157 Mo. l. c. 508, 57 S. W. 268, was characterized by Judge Sherwood as a felá de se. An act cannot be both careless and willful. Negligence is an unintentional act or omission. Willfulness is intentional, an act pur*359posely…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Johnson—Brinkman Commission Co. v. Central BankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Thorpe v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- Hilz v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1890
- Fillingham v. St. Louis Transit Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1903
- Richmond City Railway Co. v. ScottSupreme Court of Virginia · 1890
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Martin v. YeohamMissouri Court of Appeals · 1967
- Ervin v. ColemanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1970
- Oklahoma Union Railway Co. v. MitchellSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 1924
- Jones v. Springfield Traction Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1909
- Shaw v. Congress Building, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1959
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.