Mires v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad

114 S.W. 1052, 134 Mo. App. 379, 1908 Mo. App. LEXIS 654
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals
DecidedDecember 15, 1908
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 114 S.W. 1052 (Mires v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad) 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
Mires v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad, 114 S.W. 1052, 134 Mo. App. 379, 1908 Mo. App. LEXIS 654 (Mo. Ct. App. 1908).

Opinion

NORTONI, J.

In this action, plaintiff seeks to recover the value of seven jacks lost through the negligence of defendant while being transported by it in the capacity of common carrier. The plaintiff recovered and defendant appeals. The defendant undertook to carry the animals from Mountain Grove, Missouri, over its lines, partially through the State of Kansas, to Kansas City, Missouri, and there safely deliver the same to a connecting carrier for transportation to Oaksdale, in the State of Washington. There were fifteen jacks and one horse in the shipment. The evidence tended to prove that, through the negligence of defendant, fire was communicated to and ignited certain combustible material used for bedding in the car containing the animals. The fire consumed the car and resulted in the destruction of seven of the jacks. Plaintiff sues for the value of the seven jacks destroyed, which is alleged to be $3,500. The jury returned a verdict for that amount.

There are numerous errors prejudicial to the defendant in the record. The court submitted the issues on inconsistent theories and materially invaded the rights of defendant in the admission of testimony and instructions given. To notice separately each of the just grounds for complaint on appeal Avould prolong the opinion to an unpardonable extent. By treating solely with the material facts established beyond con[382]*382troversy, the case may be properly disposed of without a separate discussion of the several errors appearing.

It appears plaintiff had been engaged for thirty years in shipping stock over the railroads. He testified that during those years he had probably read as many as one hundred live stock contracts under which he shipped. On the date of the shipment in question, February 25, 1905, having loaded the animals in the car, plaintiff applied to defendant’s agent at Mountain Grove to enter into a contract with him for their transportation to Kansas City. Immediately preceding defendant’s printed form of live stock contract and on the same sheet of paper therewith, the defendant has prepared a printed application for the use of its prospective patrons who desire to avail themselves of a lesser or reduced rate of freight in consideration of surrendering certain common law rights against the carrier. Upon plaintiff proposing a contract with defendant covering the shipment involved, defendant’s agent prepared the application referred to by filling in the blanks thereof and the plaintiff executed the same by affixing his signature thereto. Completed, it appears as follows:

[383]*383

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

Related

Schade v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
221 S.W. 146 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1920)
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Lee
192 S.W. 70 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1917)
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Bolling
91 S.E. 154 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1917)
Stubblefield v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
184 S.W. 149 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1916)
Mott Store Co. v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railway Co.
168 S.W. 322 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1914)
St. Louis, Southern Railway Co. v. Spring River Stone Co.
154 S.W. 465 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1913)
Pacific Express Co. v. Rudman
145 S.W. 268 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1912)
Drey & Kahn Glass Co. v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.
136 S.W. 757 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1911)
Moore v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
127 S.W. 921 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1910)
Freeman v. St. Louis & San Francisco Railroad
122 S.W. 1 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1909)
Burgher v. Wabash Railroad
120 S.W. 673 (Missouri Court of Appeals, 1909)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
114 S.W. 1052, 134 Mo. App. 379, 1908 Mo. App. LEXIS 654, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mires-v-st-louis-san-francisco-railroad-moctapp-1908.