Abbitt v. St. Louis Transit Co.

Decision Date16 February 1904
Citation79 S.W. 496,104 Mo. App. 534
PartiesABBITT v. ST. LOUIS TRANSIT CO.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Appeal from Circuit Court, St. Charles County; E. M. Hughes, Judge.

Action by Frank Abbitt against the St. Louis Transit Company. From a judgment in favor of plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

Boyle, Priest & Lehman, T. C. Bruere, and Geo. W. Easley, for appellant. Richard Ralph, T. T. & C. H. Fauntleroy, and F. F. McDearmon, for respondent.

GOODE, J.

This plaintiff obtained a judgment for $500 against the defendant for personal injuries sustained by her in being thrown from the running board of a car by the negligent starting of the car as she was in the act of alighting. The only point made against the validity of the judgment is that the jury were erroneously instructed as to the measure of damages. The instruction of which complaint is made is this one: "The court instructs the jury that if, under the evidence and the other instructions, you decide to find for the plaintiff, you should then assess his damages at such sum as you find from the evidence to be a reasonable compensation to him for any loss of services and of the society (that is to say, of the companionship) of his said wife, and for the reasonable value of his time expended by him in necessary personal care and attention to her, if any, which you may find from the evidence have been caused to plaintiff as direct results of said injury to plaintiff's wife, as well as for such expenses as you may find from the evidence plaintiff has necessarily incurred in taking care of his wife (from the time she was disabled to the present time) on account of the injuries she directly sustained, if any, in consequence of the injury complained of, including therein compensation to plaintiff for such necessary expenses on account of the reasonable value of medical services to and medicines for her as you may find from the evidence plaintiff may have paid or become liable for in consequence of said injury to his said wife." The first ground on which that direction is attacked is that there was no evidence plaintiff paid for any medicines for his wife while she was under treatment for her injuries, and it was therefore erroneous to allow the jury to take account of the cost of medicines in estimating the damages. So far as we have gathered in an attentive perusal of the testimony, no witness testified in opposition to the testimony for the plaintiff as to the extent of the loss he sustained by his wife's injuries, and the only controversy that can be raised as to the amount of his damages is that different...

To continue reading

Request your trial
27 cases
  • Hamilton v. Patton Creamery Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 11, 1949
    ... ... Pashea v. Terminal R. Assn. of St. Louis, 165 S.W.2d ... 691, 350 Mo. 132; Hamre v. Conger, 209 S.W.2d 242; ... Suren v. Zuege, 201 ... 161, 334 Mo. 249; Wyse v. Miller, 2 S.W.2d 806, 222 ... Mo.App. 165; Abbitt v. St. Louis Transit Co., 79 ... S.W. 496, 104 Mo.App. 534; Nelson v. Met. St. Ry ... Co., 88 ... ...
  • Stewart v. George B. Peck Co.
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • July 3, 1939
    ... ... 487; Taylor v. Kansas City, 112 S.W.2d 562; ... O'Malley v. City of St. Louis, 119 S.W.2d 785; ... Frappier v. Lincoln Stores, 279 Mass. 214, 180 N.E ... 522; Chapman v ... the charges were reasonable. Abbitt v. St. Louis Transit ... Co., 104 Mo.App. 534, 79 S.W. 496; Wyse v. Miller ... (Mo. App.), 2 ... ...
  • Martin v. Shryock Realty Co.
    • United States
    • Kansas Court of Appeals
    • June 15, 1942
    ... ... Gibson v. City of St. Joseph, 216 S.W. 50, 52; ... Gately v. St. Louis S. F. Ry. Co., 56 S.W.2d 54; ... Thimmig v. Gen. Talking Pictures Corp., 85 S.W.2d ... 208, ... 347, 126 S.W. 1037; Setzer v ... Ulrich, 90 S.W.2d 154, 156; Kube v. St. Louis ... Transit Co., 103 Mo.App. 582, 78 S.W. 55; Lore v ... Mfg. Co., 160 Mo. 608, 61 S.W. 678; Musick v ... error in plaintiff's Instruction "4." Nelson v ... Met. St. Ry. Co., 88 S.W. 781; Abbitt v. St. Louis Transit ... Co., 79 S.W. 496, 497 ...          Ryland, ... Stinson, Mag & ... ...
  • McDonough v. Freund
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • July 30, 1929
    ...and was, therefore, harmless and not reversible. Shinn v. United Railways, 154 S.W. 103; Sang v. St. Louis, 254 Mo. 454; Abbitt v. Transit Co., 104 Mo.App. 534; Sherwood v. Railways Co., 132 Mo. Gantt, J. OPINION Action for damages for malpractice. Plaintiff is a hod-carrier and defendant a......
  • 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