Gilfillan v. McCrillis
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Jasper Circuit Court.—Hon. Jóhn D. Perkins, Judge. (1) The defendant had the undoubted right to defend his marital rights, and if, in pursuance of this purpose, he was assaulted by plaintiff’s husband, and thereupon shot and killed him, there is no law, natural, human or divine, that condemns him.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Jasper Circuit Court.—Hon. Jóhn D. Perkins, Judge. (1) The defendant had the undoubted right to defend his marital rights, and if, in pursuance of this purpose, he was assaulted by plaintiff’s husband, and thereupon shot and killed him, there is no law, natural, human or divine, that condemns him. If, then, Gilfillan could not have recovered if death had not ensued, the plaintiff who stands in his shoes in respect to the damages sought to be recovered, can not. Slate v. Grugin, 147 Mo. 39; R. S. 1889, secs. 4426, 4427; Goldsmith v. Joy, 61 Yt. 449; Wiley v. Carpenter, 64 Yt.…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
The case presented by the record before us is this: "William J. Gilfillan, the husband of the plaintiff, ravished and debauched the wife of the defendant, for which the latter shot and killed the former. This is an action by the plaintiff, who is the‘widow of the deceased, against the defendant to recover damages for.the death of her said husband. The plaintiff’s petition was not framed with reference to the provisions of the Act of March 18, 1895 (Sess. Acts 1895, p. 168; R. S. 1899, secs. 594, 595). No claim was made therein for punitory damages and therefore the damages sought to be…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Haehl v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Morgan v. DurfeeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1879
- Gray v. McDonaldSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- State v. GruginSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Nichols v. WinfreySupreme Court of Missouri · 1883
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Anderson v. ShockleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911