Bohle v. King, Brinsmade Mercantile Company
| Citation | 89 S.W. 1036,114 Mo.App. 439 |
| Parties | BOHLE, Appellant, v. KING, BRINSMADE MERCANTILE COMPANY, Respondent |
| Decision Date | 31 October 1905 |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court.--Hon. Jesse A. McDonald Judge.
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED.
Judgment affirmed and cause remanded.
Edward N. Robinson and Anderson & Karbe for appellant.
The court erred in sustaining respondent's motion for a new trial upon the ground that the verdict was against the weight of the evidence. Every fact essential to a recovery was supported by the evidence. Stagg v. Edward Westen Tea & Spice Co., 169 Mo. 489; Dallemand v. Saalfeldt, 175 Ill 310.
A. & J F. Lee for respondent.
The court committed no error in sustaining the motion for new trial on the ground that the verdict was against the weight of evidence, because this ground of objection was well founded, and the action of the court upon the motion is one of the matters within the discretion of the trial judge. State ex rel. Todd, 92 Mo.App. 4.
Plaintiff's husband was killed while in the employ of the defendant company, August 20, 1903, and this action was brought to recover damages for his death, alleged to have been due to the defendant's negligence. The accident occurred in the evening about 7:40 o'clock. Defendant is engaged in the wholesale millinery business. The tendency of the evidence for the plaintiff was to prove that just prior to his death the deceased was working on the fourth floor of the building occupied by the defendant as its place of business; that during the day he had been ordered by the vice-president of the company to come back to work in the evening; that the vice-president told the deceased to use elevator No. 3, the one on which he was hurt, as there would be nobody using it that evening; that as the elevator ascended Bohle went to the elevator shaft to stop it for the purpose of loading boxes, but in some manner was caught by the elevator and carried upward until his back struck the elevator gate, when he fell to the basement and was killed.
The acts of negligence alleged are: first, not posting notices giving warning of the dangerous character of the elevator second, ordering Bohle to use the elevator when he was known to be inexperienced in such work and ignorant of the dangers incident to it, and, third, not having a competent operator in charge of it. A certain ordinance of the city of St. Louis, providing that all persons running cars or elevators shall be competent operators, was pleaded in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial