Tickell v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
This text of 90 Mo. 296 (Tickell v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Missouri primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This action was begun, in the circuit court of New Madrid county, to recover double damages for injuries to certain described stock. A trial thereof resulted in a verdict and judgment for plain tiff, from which defendant has appealed. The only question involved or presented in this court is as to the sufficiency of the petition. The petition charges that the mules came upon the track of said railroad where it passes through uninclosed lands, and where there was no crossing of the railroad by any public highway; that defendant failed, and neg[299]*299lected to keep and maintain a lawful fence at the point where the mules got upon the track and were killed, and that the killing of the mules was occasioned, then and there, by the failure of defendant to erect and maintain such lawful fences on the sides of its road. Under the later decisions of this court, these averments were, we think, sufficient, and satisfy the rule that thelallégations must show that the animals got on the track at a point where the defendant was required by law to erect and maintain fences, and that the killing did not occur within the limits of an incorporated town. Williams v. Railroad, 80 Mo. 597; Manz v. Railroad, 87 Mo. 278.
The judgment will, therefore, be affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
90 Mo. 296, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tickell-v-st-louis-iron-mountain-southern-railway-co-mo-1886.