Knoell v. Kansas City, C. C. & St. J. Ry. Co.
Decision Date | 05 November 1917 |
Docket Number | No. 12378.,12378. |
Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Parties | KNOELL v. KANSAS CITY, C. C. & ST. J. RY. CO. et al. |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Buchanan County; Thomas B. Allen, Judge.
"Not to be officially published."
Suit by Dorothy Knoell against the Kansas City, Clay County & St. Joseph Railway Company and its receivers. Judgment for plaintiff, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.
John E. Dolman, of St. Joseph, for appellants. Culver & Phillip, of St. Joseph, for respondent.
The defendants operate an interurban electric railway between Kansas City, Mo., and St. Joseph, Mo. Plaintiff brought this suit charging that defendants, through their agent in charge of their ticket office in Kansas City, Mo., "wrongfully, wantonly, unlawfully, maliciously, willfully, and in utter disregard of the courtesy due to plaintiff," "declared, charged and insinuated," "in an insolent and insulting manner," that plaintiff was endeavoring to defraud defendants by obtaining a ticket from Kansas City to St. Joseph, Mo., without paying for the same. Plaintiff recovered judgment in the sum of $2 actual damages and $498 punitive damages.
Plaintiff testified that on January 3, 1916, she, in company with three other ladies, went to defendants' ticket office in Kansas City, Mo., and purchased from defendants' ticket agent tickets to St. Joseph, Mo. What happened is best told in plaintiff's own language:
Mrs. Hahn, one of plaintiff's witnesses, testified that, after she came back from hunting among the other ladies for the ticket and was unable to find it, the agent said, "There, I told you that I had given you people a ticket, No. 88 is missing." He says, "Some of you must have that ticket." She (plaintiff) said: "No, we haven't got the ticket; aren't you going to give us another ticket or our money?" And he said, "I sure don't intend to give you the ticket or your money, for you people have got the ticket — some of you have it." "I know we talked there quite a little bit about the money and the ticket, but I don't remember just exactly everything that was said." On cross-examination, Mrs. Hahn, when asked whether there was any direct accusation made by the agent to plaintiff or herself "that either one of you had stolen the ticket," replied that he, the agent, "said she had it"; that "he may not have used that word" stealing, "but insisted that we had that ticket," and "he accused us of taking it." This witness also testified that plaintiff was "very much humiliated and embarrassed," that "she was in quite an embarrassed nervous state and felt terribly bad;" that she "showed it quite plainly."
Witness Mrs. Miller testified that plaintiff seemed to be very nervous and agitated and had a severe sick headache the day afterward and was sick for several days. Mr. Lowe, another witness, testified that the agent "became very vehement and talked rather impudent to the young lady"; that "I...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fletcher v. City of Independence
... ... George E. Kapke, Joe F. Willerth, Independence, for appellant ... James C. Wirken, Sue A. Sperry, Kansas City, for respondent ... Before PRITCHARD, P.J., and SHANGLER and DIXON, JJ ... Page 162 ... SHANGLER, Judge ... ...
-
Boyles v. Burnett
... ... 288 BERTINA BOYLES, Respondent, v. S. D. BURNETT, Appellant Court of Appeals of Missouri, Kansas CityMarch 5, 1923 ... Appeal ... from the Circuit Court of Jackson ... the deed recorded but instead carried it with him to Kansas ... City, Mo., where he remained for a short time prior to going ... to Colorado where, as stated, he died ... [Franz ... v. Hilterbrand, 45 Mo. 121; Grier v. Railroad, ... 228 S.W. 454 (Mo.); Knoell v. Railroad, 198 S.W. 79 ... (Mo. App.)] ... Finally ... defendant charges ... ...
-
Boyles v. Burnett
...we rule against defendant on this point. Franz v. Hilterbrand, 45 Mo. 121; Grier v. Railroad, 286 Mo. 523, 228 S. W. 460; Knoell v. Railroad (Mo. App.) 198 S. W. 79. Finally defendant charges error in the giving of plaintiff's instruction No. 3, for the reason that it does not distinguish b......
-
Geiger v. City of St. Joseph
...198 S.W. 78 ... CITY OF ST. JOSEPH ... No. 12382 ... Kansas" City Court of Appeals. Missouri ... November 5, 1917 ... Appeal from Circuit Court, Buchanan County; Thomas B. Allen, Judge ... \xC2" ... ...