Nolon v. Chicago & Alton Railroad
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Moberly Court of Common Pleas, Hon. G-. H. Bhrokhartt, Judge. The case and facts stated in the opinion. I. Defendant was not liable to plaintiff, under section 809, Revised Statutes, for the loss of his mule. Fences are required for the benefit and protection of the adjacent land owner alone: Berry v. Railroad, 65 Mo. 172; Harrington v. Railroad, 71 Mo. 384; Peddicord v. Railroad, 85 Mo. 160. II.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Moberly Court of Common Pleas, Hon. G-. H. Bhrokhartt, Judge. The case and facts stated in the opinion. I. Defendant was not liable to plaintiff, under section 809, Revised Statutes, for the loss of his mule. Fences are required for the benefit and protection of the adjacent land owner alone: Berry v. Railroad, 65 Mo. 172; Harrington v. Railroad, 71 Mo. 384; Peddicord v. Railroad, 85 Mo. 160. II. The land owner may waive the right, and it will be a defence to a suit for damages under section 809, Revised Statutes. Thomas v. Railroad, 82 Mo. 541; EUis v. Railroad, 48 Mo. 233. A…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
This suit was commenced before a justice of the peace for double damages under section 809, for killing a mule belonging to plaintiff.
-Tohn Hamilton owned a tract of enclosed land through which defendant’s road ran. In order to straighten its road through Hamilton’s land, defendant *355had determined to build a new track, and for this purpose had purchased from Hamilton the right of way. The new road left the old one on the east side of Hamilton’s land, and came to it again on the west side.
Between the new right of way and the old road a narrow strip of Hamilton’s land was left coming to points…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Thomas v. Hannibal & St. Joseph RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
3Cited by2 opinions
- American Central Insurance v. Chicago & Alton Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1898
- Meadows v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1899