State ex rel. Waters v. Hostetter., 36240.

Citation126 S.W.2d 1164
Decision Date04 April 1939
Docket NumberNo. 36240.,36240.
PartiesSTATE OF MISSOURI at the relation of RAYMOND G. WATERS, Relator, v. JEFFERSON D. HOSTETTER, WILLIAM DEE BECKER and EDWARD J. McCULLEN, Judges of the St. Louis Court of Appeals.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Missouri
126 S.W.2d 1164
STATE OF MISSOURI at the relation of RAYMOND G. WATERS, Relator,
v.
JEFFERSON D. HOSTETTER, WILLIAM DEE BECKER and EDWARD J. McCULLEN, Judges of the St. Louis Court of Appeals.
No. 36240.
Supreme Court of Missouri.
Court en Banc, April 4, 1939.

Certiorari.

RECORD QUASHED.

Eagleton, Waechter, Elam & Clark for relator.

The opinion and decision of the respondent Judges of the St. Louis Court of Appeals now under review; Waters v. Hays, 118 S.W. (2d) 39, in holding that this court, in the certiorari proceeding to review the first or earlier opinion of said St. Louis Court of Appeals, State ex rel. Steinbruegge v. Hostetter, 115 S.W. (2d) 802, had passed upon the defendant Steinbruegge's demurrer to the evidence, and had ruled all the evidence to be insufficient to make a submissible case for this relator (plaintiff below) against Steinbruegge under the doctrine of respondeat superior, is in direct conflict with the prior controlling decision of this court in State ex rel. Steinbruegge v. Hostetter, supra, for the reason that the opinion and decision of this court in State ex rel. Steinbruegge v. Hostetter, supra, did not rule, nor undertake to rule either upon the sufficiency of the evidence to make a submissible case against said Steinbruegge or upon the demurrer to the evidence filed by said Steinbruegge. State ex rel. Steinbruegge v. Hostetter, 115 S.W. (2d) 802.

A.A. Alexander and T.J. Crowder for respondents.

(1) Relator seeks to quash the opinion and record of the St. Louis Court of Appeals in the case of Waters v. Hays et al., 118 S.W. (2d) 39, on account of conflict allegedly existing between said opinion of the Court of Appeals and the opinion and decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State ex rel. Steinbruegge v. Hostetter et al., 115 S.W. (2d) 802. The burden is upon relator to point out the previous decisions of the Supreme Court which he claims are contravened or impugned by the opinion of the Court of Appeals; and also to point out the conflicts which exist. State ex rel. Silberforb v. Smith, 43 S.W. (2d) 1054; State ex rel. Tunget v. Shain, 101 S.W. (2d) 1; State ex rel. Quercus Lbr. Co. v. Robertson, 197 S.W. 79; State ex rel. Kansas City v. Trimble, 20 S.W. (2d) 17. (2) The Supreme Court in ruling certiorari to quash the opinion and record of the Court of Appeals is concerned only with conflict and the actual rulings of the Court of Appeals. State ex rel. Silberforb v. Smith, 43 S.W. (2d) 1054; State ex rel. Heuring v. Allen, 112 S.W. (2d) 843; State ex rel. Pub. Serv. Co. v. Shane, 119 S.W. (2d) 220.

ELLISON, J.


Certiorari bringing up the record in Waters v. Hays et al., 118 S.W. (2d) 39, from the St. Louis Court of Appeals. Our writ has been issued to the judges of that court twice in the cause, first at the instance of one of the defendants and this time at the relation of the plaintiff Waters. He sued Joseph Hays and William Steinbruegge in the Circuit Court of St. Louis for damages for personal injuries suffered when he was struck by an automobile driven by Hays

126 S.W.2d 1165

and owned by Steinbruegge. He recovered a judgment against...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT