Carson v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co., 12189.

CourtCourt of Appeal of Missouri (US)
Writing for the CourtJohnson
Citation190 S.W. 949
Decision Date19 December 1916
Docket NumberNo. 12189.,12189.
PartiesCARSON v. MISSOURI, K. & T. RY. CO.
190 S.W. 949
CARSON
v.
MISSOURI, K. & T. RY. CO.
No. 12189.
Kansas City Court of Appeals. Missouri.
December 19, 1916.
Rehearing Denied December 29, 1916.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Cooper County; J. G. Slate, Judge.

"Not to be officially published."

Action by Hinton V. Carson against the Missouri, Kansas & Texas Railway Company. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Affirmed.

See, also, 184 S. W. 1039.

J. W. Jamison, Gen. Counsel Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co., of St. Louis, for appellant. Sam. C. Major, of Fayette, and Williams & Williams, of Boonville, for respondent.

JOHNSON, J.


This action is founded upon the alleged noncompliance by defendant railroad company with the provisions of section 3150, R. S. 1909, requiring such companies — "to cause to be constructed and maintained * * * suitable ditches and drains along each side of the roadbed of such railroad, to connect with ditches, drains, or water courses, so as to afford sufficient outlet to drain and carry off the water, including surface water, along such railroad whenever the draining of such water has been obstructed or rendered necessary by the construction of such railroad."

Plaintiff owns a farm near Pearson in Howard county lying in bottom lands just south of defendant's railroad which runs east and west. A natural water course known as Salt creek comes out of the hills lying to the north and turning east runs parallel to the railroad on the north side thereof, a distance of 3 or 3½ miles east, when it crosses over to the south side of the railroad and continues on to the Missouri river. In August, 1910, and in June, 1912, heavy rainfalls caused Salt creek to overflow and inundate the bottom lands, including plaintiff's farm, and the flood waters submerged the farm for such a time that the crops were destroyed.

In two counts the petition seeks the recovery of damages for these inundations on the ground that they were caused by the failure of defendant to construct and maintain a drainage ditch along the south side of the roadbed to drain off the flood waters on the subsidence of the overflow of Salt creek. A trial of the issues raised by the pleadings resulted in a verdict and judgment for plaintiff on both counts, and in due course of procedure an appeal was allowed defendant to the Supreme Court. Throughout the case defendant attacked the constitutionality of section 3150, R. S. 1909, but the Supreme Court held that issue had been foreclosed in the decision in Tranbarger v. Railroad, 250 Mo. 46, 156 S. W. 694, and transferred the cause to this court. Counsel for defendant insist that a verdict on both counts should have

190 S.W. 950

been...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Pearson Elevator Co. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 5, 1935
    ...all questions in this case have been decided in Carson v. Shaft, 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Ry. Co., 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Ry. Co., 190 S.W. 949. (2) The evidence shows that the elevator could not be pumped out and no instruction was asked upon the measure of damages by appellant. Brown v. ......
  • Boggs v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co., 17359
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kansas
    • May 23, 1932
    ...(Mo. App.) 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. (Mo. Sup.) 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 190 S.W. 949. The instruction was not erroneous in not mentioning openings in the roadbed. The statute did not and does not require the defendant to construc......
  • Pearson Elevator Co. v. M.-K.-T. Ry. Co., 31776.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 5, 1935
    ...all questions in this case have been decided in Carson v. Shaft, 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Ry. Co., 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Ry. Co., 190 S.W. 949. (2) The evidence shows that the elevator could not be pumped out and no instruction was asked upon the measure of damages by appellant. Brown v. ......
  • Boggs v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 5, 1935
    ...of the plaintiff, was a proper declaration of law. Carson v. Shaft, 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Ry. Co., 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Ry. Co., 190 S.W. 949. (a) Defendant joined in trying the case in the trial court on the theory that defendant was required to dig ditches within three months after ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Pearson Elevator Co. v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 5, 1935
    ...all questions in this case have been decided in Carson v. Shaft, 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Ry. Co., 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Ry. Co., 190 S.W. 949. (2) The evidence shows that the elevator could not be pumped out and no instruction was asked upon the measure of damages by appellant. Brown v. ......
  • Boggs v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas R. Co., 17359
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Kansas
    • May 23, 1932
    ...(Mo. App.) 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. (Mo. Sup.) 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Missouri, K. & T. Ry. Co. (Mo. App.) 190 S.W. 949. The instruction was not erroneous in not mentioning openings in the roadbed. The statute did not and does not require the defendant to construc......
  • Pearson Elevator Co. v. M.-K.-T. Ry. Co., 31776.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 5, 1935
    ...all questions in this case have been decided in Carson v. Shaft, 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Ry. Co., 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Ry. Co., 190 S.W. 949. (2) The evidence shows that the elevator could not be pumped out and no instruction was asked upon the measure of damages by appellant. Brown v. ......
  • Boggs v. Missouri-Kansas-Texas Ry. Co.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
    • March 5, 1935
    ...of the plaintiff, was a proper declaration of law. Carson v. Shaft, 221 S.W. 825; Carson v. Ry. Co., 184 S.W. 1039; Carson v. Ry. Co., 190 S.W. 949. (a) Defendant joined in trying the case in the trial court on the theory that defendant was required to dig ditches within three months after ......
  • 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