Schaub v. St. Louis Transit Co.

Decision Date02 May 1905
Citation87 S.W. 85,112 Mo. App. 529
PartiesSCHAUB v. ST. LOUIS TRANSIT CO.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Robt. M. Foster, Judge.

Action by Henry J. Schaub against the St. Louis Transit Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Boyle, Priest & Lehman and Morton Jourdon, for appellant. C. A. Schnake and O. J. Mudd, for respondent.

Opinion.

GOODE, J.

Plaintiff obtained a judgment against the defendant for a personal injury to himself, the death of his horse, and damages to a wagon he was driving. The several injuries were caused by one of the defendant's trolley cars running against plaintiff and his horse and wagon. The accident happened at the intersection of Bartmer and Hamilton avenues, in the city of St. Louis, April 8, 1904, about 8 o'clock in the evening. The plaintiff and his friend Luke Tiernon had ridden in the wagon west along Bartmer avenue, which runs east and west, to its intersection with Hamilton avenue, running north and south. The defendant's street car tracks extend along Hamilton avenue. Schaub was driving and attempted to cross the defendant's tracks on Hamilton avenue, but the horse stalled when the front wheels of the wagon came against the east rail of the car track. This was due to the fact that a hole had been washed in the surface of the street at that point, into which the wheels sank so deep that the horse was unable to pull the wagon over the track. Schaub urged the horse for a few minutes, and then, realizing that probably they could not get out of their awkward position before a car came along, told Tiernon to jump out of the wagon, go south along the track, and stop a car which might approach. Tiernon ran along the track for about 300 feet, fell into an open sewer, scrambled out, and about that time a car passed. He shouted as loudly as he could to the motorman, who failed to hear or to understand him, and went ahead with the car. There was a passenger aboard, who wished to get off at Bartmer avenue. The car slackened speed somewhat, but ran into the horse and wagon, knocked the plaintiff senseless, and severely injured him, killed the horse, and broke the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Brunke v. Missouri & K. Telephone Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • May 8, 1905
    ......Louis Brunke against the Missouri & Kansas Telephone Company. From a judgment for plaintiff, defendant ......
  • Mertens v. St. Louis Transit Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • December 11, 1906
    ...to avoid the accident by stopping or slackening the speed of the car, to give plaintiff an opportunity to get out of the way. Schaub v. Transit Co., 112 Mo.App. 529; DeGel Transit Co., 101 Mo.App. 56; Klockenbrink v. Railroad, 172 Mo. 678; Schafstette v. Railroad, 170 Mo. 142; Scullin v. Ra......
  • Brunke v. Missouri & Kansas Telephone Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kansas
    • May 8, 1905
    ...87 S.W. 84 112 Mo.App. 623 LOUIS BRUNKE, Respondent, v. MISSOURI & KANSAS TELEPHONE CO., Appellant Court of Appeals of Missouri, ......
  • Mertens v. St. Louis Transit Co.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Missouri (US)
    • December 11, 1906
    ...34 S. W. 76; Reardon v. Railway, 114 Mo. 384, 21 S. W. 731; Guenther v. Railway, 108 Mo., loc. cit. 21, 18 S. W. 846; Schaub v. Transit Co., 112 Mo. App. 529, 87 S. W. 85. The instruction properly presented this doctrine to the jury and is approved. Aside from this, the vigilant watch ordin......
  • 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