Taylor v. Grand Ave. Ry. Co.

Decision Date09 February 1897
Citation137 Mo. 363,39 S.W. 88
PartiesTAYLOR et al. v. GRAND AVE. RY. CO. et al.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

1. Plaintiff was a passenger on an electric car which collided with a cable car at a crossing. The two car companies, defendants, jointly employed a flagman, and it was his duty to direct the crossing of the cars on each line by signals. Held error to charge that, if the flagman signaled the cable car forward, it had the right to proceed, though the electric car could be seen by the gripman, and was then approaching the crossing.

2. It was error to charge merely that there could be no recovery against the cable company if the motorman operating the electric car failed to exercise the care on his part required by law in approaching the crossing.

Appeal from circuit court, Jackson county; S. W. Moore, Judge.

Action by Augusta Taylor and husband against the Grand Avenue Railway Company and the Northeast Street Railway Company. There was judgment for plaintiffs against the Northeast Street Railway only. From an order granting a new trial, the Grand Avenue Railway Company appeals. Affirmed.

Karnes, Holmes & Krauthoff, for appellant. L. H. Waters, for respondents.

ROBINSON, J.

This is an action by Augusta Taylor and her husband for damages for injuries resulting to the wife while a passenger upon one of the cars of the Northeast Street Railway Company of Kansas City. The defendants are the Grand Avenue Railway Company and the Northeast Railway Company, each operating a street railway in Kansas City. The Grand Avenue Company operates a cable, and the Northeast Company an electric street railway, crossing each other at the intersection of Fifth and Walnut streets in said city; the Grand Avenue Company at that point running north and south, and the Northeast Company running east and west. The petition charges that the defendants "maintained at said crossing a watchman, whose duty it then and there was to signal the employés of the defendants in charge of the cars of the defendants as the said cars approached the said crossing of the said tracks at the intersection of said Walnut and Fifth streets, and thereby inform said employés when the cars under their control might or should cross over the said crossing, and thereby prevent the cars of the defendants from colliding at said crossing." After alleging the manner of Mrs. Taylor's injuries, and the nature and extent of her suffering, the petition states further "that said collision was the result of, and was caused by, the negligence of the said switchman, who then and there failed and neglected to give the respective employés in charge of the said cars, as they approached said crossing, such warning and signals as would have then and there enabled said employés, by the use of ordinary care and caution on their part, to have avoided said collision; and by the negligence of the employés of said defendants in charge of said cars which collided as aforesaid, in running, managing, and conducting the said cars under their respective control in a negligent manner." The answer of the Northeast Company was a general denial, and a plea of contributory negligence on the part of Mrs. Taylor. The Grand Avenue Company filed a general denial. The plaintiff Augusta Taylor was a passenger on a west-bound car of the defendant the Northeast Railway Company, and was knocked to the floor of the car and injured by reason of the car in which she was riding colliding with and running against a northbound car running on the tracks of the Grand Avenue Company at the intersection of Fifth and Walnut streets, where the two street-car tracks cross each other. The case was tried by a jury, and resulted in a verdict in favor of the defendant the Grand Avenue Company, and against the defendant the Northeast Railway Company. The plaintiffs and the Northeast Railway Company both filed ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
29 cases
  • Barr v. Nafziger Baking Co., 29575.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 28, 1931
    ... ... [Wiggin v. City of St. Louis, 135 Mo. 558, 37 S.W. 528; Taylor v. Grand Avenue Ry. Co., 137 Mo. 363, 39 S.W. 88; Beave v. St. Louis Transit Co., 212 Mo. 331, 111 ... ...
  • Homan v. Mo. Pac. Railroad Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • November 7, 1933
    ... ... p. 10 et seq.; Toeneboehn v. St. Louis-S.F. Ry. Co., 317 Mo. 1116, 298 S.W. 801; Grand Trunk Ry. Co. v. Ives, 144 U.S. 408, 36 L. Ed. 492; Thomas v. Chicago, R.I. & P. Ry. Co., 271 S.W ... Homan v. Railroad, Op. p. 15; Clark v. Railroad Co., 127 Mo. 213; Taylor v. Grand Ave. Ry. Co., 137 Mo. 368, 39 S.W. 88; Neal v. Curtis & Co., Mfg. Co., 328 Mo. 389, 41 ... ...
  • O'Brien v. Rindskopf
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • April 19, 1934
    ... ... Becker, 11 S.W. (2d) 8; Neal v. Curtis & Co. Mfg. Co., 328 Mo. 389, 41 S.W. (2d) 543; Taylor v. Grand Ave. Ry. Co., 137 Mo. 363, 39 S.W. 88; Miller v. United Rys. Co., 155 Mo. App. 528, 134 ... ...
  • Neal v. Curtis Co. Mfg. Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 28, 1931
    ... ... negligent and but for its negligence the injury would not have happened, is illustrated by Taylor v. Grand Avenue Railway Company, 137 Mo. 363, where two street railroad cars of different companies ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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