Gray v. Earls
Decision Date | 06 April 1923 |
Docket Number | No. 22857.,22857. |
Citation | 298 Mo. 116,250 S.W. 567 |
Parties | GRAY et al. v. EARLS et al. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Pemiscot County; Sterling H. McCarty, Judge.
Action by Leslie Gray and others, by their guardian, Ella Gray, against A. T. Earls and another. Judgment for defendants, and the plaintiffs appeal. Reversed and remanded.
Ward & Reeves, of Caruthersville, for appellants.
McKay & Medling, of Caruthersville, H. E. Doerner, of Steele, and C. E. Bragg of Caruthersville, for respondents.
On the 25th day of September, 1919, one Ollie Gray died as the result of gunshot wounds inflicted upon him on that day by respondents. On June 16, 1920, the appellants, minor children of deceased brought this suit for damages in the sum of $10,000 in the circuit court of Pemiscot county by their guardian, the mother of appellants, and widow of Ollie Gray, who had not in her own behalf brought suit on account of the death of her husband. There was a verdict for defendants by, ten jurors, and from the judgment thereon plaintiffs have appealed by due steps taken.
The petition charged that the defendants "wrongfully" fired and discharged a loaded gun at and against Ollie Gray, "thereby wrongfully and without any just cause or excuse injuring and wounding the said Ollie Gray, from which injuries and wounds and unlawful acts of the defendants" he immediately thereafter died. The petition did not charge negligence, nor did it set forth the particular circumstances under which the shooting was done by defendants. The separate answers filed by the defendants were identical in character, each consisting of (1) a general denial, (2) a plea of self-defense, and (3) a plea that the shooting and killing was caused by the negligence and carelessness of Ollie Gray directly contributing thereto. There was no specification of facts constituting either of these defenses. Plaintiff's reply was a general' denial. Defendants objected to the introduction of any evidence upon the grounds that the petition failed to state a cause of action against defendants, or either of them, and that there was, a misjoinder of parties defendant. The objection was overruled, and defendants excepted.
The shooting occurred at night, and near the cabin of one Tom Collins, a negro. The persons present were defendants, Ed Stout and Alvin Earls, a man named Hannah; Ollie Gray, and Tom Collins. All of them had crops in one inclosed field of about 160 acres adjacent to the cabin of Tom Collins, and all lived near by. This negro had been stealing corn from the fields of the others, and they had been watching to catch him stealing. All four of them had been watching the negro on the afternoon and night of the day before the day on which the shooting occurred. On the night before they had heard him pulling corn in Gray's field, and heard later the sounds as of a sack being thrown down and the feeding of hogs. Defendant Earls testified that on that occasion they heard near the hog pen the sound of talking, and Ollie Gray said it was "Knox and Tom," Knox being also a negro and living near to the other. They agreed to watch again the following night. On the next afternoon Hannah and Earls watched the negro Tom Collins, and noticed be was wearing a white shirt. The arrangement was that the four of them should meet again that night, at the place they had met the night before. The defendants and Hannah, all armed with shotguns, went that night to the placed agreed upon, which appears to have been in the field of defendant Stout. For some reason not appearing Ollie Gray did not join them there. He went alone. On that afternoon Earls says he told Gray they were going armed and to bring his gun, and that Gray replied it was out of commission. Earls suggested he get one, but Gray did not promise to do so. He went unarmed, and apparently into his own field of corn, to watch for the negro. The three others watched for the negro Tom Collins from a point not far from his cabin, and not far from the field of Ollie Gray. Toward 11 o'clock the negro, Collins, came out singing. They heard him say, "It feel like a 16 year old to-night." He went toward the cornfield of Ollie Gray, and they heard a sound as of some one pulling corn. They moved up to a path by which"they expected the negro to return, hut, as he did not return that way, and hearing sounds from the negro's hog pen, near his house, as of corn being thrown down, and as if hogs were being fed, they moved up that way. Earls and Hannah told defendant Stout, who was hard of hearing, of the sounds, and placed him between themselves so he might hear what was said by the others. They went forward. They came to where there were some boxes or coops piled up, and there were some trees about. It was very dark. As they passed the boxes they saw the forms of two men. The negro Tom Collins was nearest to Hannah, who advanced quickly and threw his gun down on the negro, telling him to hold up his hands. This the negro did, saying, "They are up, Mr. Hannah." This was heard by Earls, who was on the right, and nearer than Hannah was to the man, who proved to be Ollie Gray, who was to the right of, and several feet distant from the negro. Earle was nearest Gray, who was standing, or slowly walking up at that time. The two defendants, moving up, presented their guns at the other man (Gray), and Earls called three or four times, "Throw up your hands" or "stick up your hands, Tom." This was heard by Stout, and also by Hannah, whose attention was directed chiefly to the negro. Gray had his hands down by his side, but it was too dark to tell whether they were in his pockets or not. He was dressed in blue or dark clothes.
The defendant Stout described what happened from the time they saw the two men as follows:
Cross-examination:
The defendant Earls described it as follows:
Cross-examination:
Defendant Earls, in the course of his cross-examination, also testified:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Parker
...5 Am.Jur.2d, Arrest, Sec. 70, p. 756; Alexander, The Law of Arrest, Sec. 93, p. 479; 6 C.J.S. Arrest Sec. 6e, p. 602; Gray v. Earls, 298 Mo. 116, 250 S.W. 567(2), and cases at 572; State v. Nolan, 354 Mo. 980, 192 S.W.2d 1016, 1020; see State v. Rollins, 226 Mo. 524, 126 S.W. 478.12 Restate......
-
Morton v. St. Louis-San Francisco Ry. Co.
... ... the innocence of the intent. [Atkins v. State, 11 Tex.App ... Our own ... court has very recently said, in Gray v. Earls, 298 ... Mo. 116, 135: "The petition does not use the word ... 'intentionally,' but, taking the language actually ... used, it must be ... ...
-
Teel v. May Department Stores Co.
...it was illegal and unjustified at law, as the alleged offense was not committed in his presence. 6 C. J. S. 580-581, 608; Gray v. Earls, 298 Mo. 116, 250 S.W. 567, 572. Zytowski did not pretend, at the time of the imprisonment, that he was arresting the plaintiff for the offense here charge......
-
State ex rel. Automobile Co. v. Daues
...v. Railroad, 126 Mo. 143; Ruschenberg v. Railroad, 161 Mo. 70; Koenig v. Railroad, 173 Mo. 698; Frye v. Railroad, 200 Mo. 377; Gray v. Earls, 298 Mo. 116. Eugene J. McMahon and Charles E. Morrow for (1) The evidence made a prima-facie case that the driver of the automobile was acting as the......