Lammert ex rel. Lammert v. Parker

Missouri Court of Appeals

Lammert ex rel. Lammert v. Parker

500 S.W.2d 274, 1973 Mo. App. LEXIS 1142

CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

DecidedSeptember 25, 1973

DocketNo. 34638

StatusPublished

This text of 500 S.W.2d 274 (Lammert ex rel. Lammert v. Parker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Missouri Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lammert ex rel. Lammert v. Parker, 500 S.W.2d 274, 1973 Mo. App. LEXIS 1142 (Mo. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

KELLY, Judge.

This appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County entered upon a jury verdict in a negligence case arising out of an automobile collision wherein the appellant Robyn M. Lammert, a minor, sustained personal injuries, and appellant Val Lammert, her father, incurred expenses for hospital, doctor, ambulance services, x-rays, drugs and loss of earnings. The jury returned a verdict in behalf of both Miss Lammert and her father against a co-defendant, but found for the respondent and against both appellants on their claims against him.

The only point raised on appeal is the refusal of the trial judge to read to the jury at the appellants’ request an instruction submitting alleged negligence of the respondent in that he “drove at an excessive speed.” MAI 17.02 and MAI 19.01. The case was submitted to the jury on the issue of respondent’s failure to keep a careful look-out.

We have examined the record and find that there was no substantial evidence upon which the trial court could have submitted to the jury the issue of excessive speed with respect to this respondent.

We further find that the opinion in this case would have no precedential value.

We affirm and further find that this af-firmance is in compliance with Rule 84.16, V.A.M.R.

SMITH, P. J., and SIMEONE, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

MEMORANDUM OPINION

KELLY, Judge.

This appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court of St. Louis County entered upon a jury verdict in a negligence case arising out of an automobile collision wherein the appellant Robyn M. Lammert, a minor, sustained personal injuries, and appellant Val Lammert, her father, incurred expenses for hospital, doctor, ambulance services, x-rays, drugs and loss of earnings. The jury returned a verdict in behalf of both Miss Lammert and her father against a co-defendant, but found for the respondent and against both appellants on their claims against him.

The only point raised on appeal is the refusal of the trial judge to read to the jury at the appellants’ request an instruction submitting alleged negligence of the respondent in that he “drove at an excessive speed.” MAI 17.02 and MAI 19.01. The case was submitted to the jury on the issue of respondent’s failure to keep a careful look-out.

We have examined the record and find that there was no substantial evidence upon which the trial court could have submitted to the jury the issue of excessive speed with respect to this respondent.

We further find that the opinion in this case would have no precedential value.

We affirm and further find that this af-firmance is in compliance with Rule 84.16, V.A.M.R.

SMITH, P. J., and SIMEONE, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

500 S.W.2d 274, 1973 Mo. App. LEXIS 1142, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lammert-ex-rel-lammert-v-parker-moctapp-1973.