Mann v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.

86 Mo. 347
Supreme Court of Missouri·Decided April 15, 1885·Published·Cited by 8 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

— In our opinion plaintiff has no right of action or standing in court. The defendant owed no duty to him even if the crossing were defective or out of repair. In addition to that, the defect, if any, does not appear to have been brought to the notice of the company, or that the defect had existed for a sufficient time ■from which to presume notice to the defendant.

If the party, for whose benefit the crossing was built had, in like circumstances been injured, a different question would) perhaps, be presented, not necessary now to foe considered. Judgment reversed.

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

Mann v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co., 86 Mo. 347 (Mo. 1885).

86 Mo. 347 (Mann v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hanson v. Blackwell Motor Company
255 P. 939 (Washington Supreme Court, 1927)
Louisville & Nashville Railroad v. Wright
251 S.W. 188 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1923)
Bryant v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
168 S.W. 228 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
O'Brien v. American Bridge Co.
125 N.W. 1012 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1910)
Lowenstein v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
119 S.W. 430 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1908)
Ninneman v. Fox
86 P. 213 (Washington Supreme Court, 1906)
Baltimore & Ohio S. W. Ry. Co. v. Keck
84 Ill. App. 159 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1899)
Roddy v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
104 Mo. 234 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1891)