McBride v. Gurney
| Decision Date | 02 May 1916 |
| Docket Number | No. 14303.,14303. |
| Citation | 185 S.W. 735 |
| Parties | McBRIDE v. GURNEY. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Suit by Emilia McBride against James Gurney, Jr. To review a judgment for defendant, plaintiff brings error. Judgment affirmed.
T. J. Rowe, of St. Louis, for plaintiff in error. A. R. Russell, of St. Louis, for defendant in error.
The petition in this case avers that one Victor McBride, with his family, of which plaintiff was a member, being his wife, was in possession of and occupied a certain building in the city of St. Louis as a residence; that defendant rented this building to Victor McBride to be used and occupied by him and his family as a residence and was so occupying the premises as tenant of defendant from month to month; that defendant had agreed with Victor McBride to keep the building in good repair and in a safe and tenantable condition; that there was a porch attached to the rear of the building and forming a part of it, and that on a day named and while Victor McBride and his family were in the occupancy of the building, defendant had carelessly and negligently failed and refused to keep this porch, as he had agreed to do, in good repair and in a safe and tenantable condition, to the end that it might be safely used by Victor McBride and by the plaintiff, his wife and a member of his family; that defendant had carelessly suffered the railing and banister of the porch of the building and the fastenings thereof to become rotten and unsafe and dangerous; that defendant had been frequently requested to repair the outer down spout of the building which was leaking and causing the nails of the railing and banister to rot; that by reason of that fact the nails and fastenings of the railing and banister on the porch became rotten, the banister on the porch unsafe, untenantable and in a dangerous condition, of which defendant was given due notice; that on a day named while plaintiff was using the rear porch and was leaning on the banister and railing, the nails and fastenings being in a rotten and unsafe condition through the carelessness and negligence of defendant, gave way and caused her to fall from the porch to the ground, injuring her, to her damage in the sum of $5,000.
To this, which was an amended petition, defendant demurred, on the ground, among others, that it did not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Logsdon v. Central Development Ass'n
...Coughlin, 176 Mo.App. 275, 161 S.W. 888; Murphy v. Dee, 190 Mo.App. 83, 175 S.W. 287; Dailey v. Vogl, 187 Mo.App. 261, 173 S.W. 707; McBride v. Gurney, supra; v. Loeffel, supra. (3) The evidence on behalf of plaintiff fails to establish any contract made by the defendant to keep the premise......
-
Logsdon, v. Cen. Dev. Assn., Inc.
...463, 188 S.W. 155; Lahtinen v. Continental Bldg. Co., 97 S.W. (2d) 102; Glenn v. Hill, 210 Mo. 291, 109 S.W. 27; McBride v. Gurney (St. Louis Court of Appeals), 185 S.W. 735; Gray v. Pearline, 328 Mo. 1192, 43 S.W. (2d) 802; Mahnken v. Gillespie, 329 Mo. 51, 43 S.W. (2d) 797; Meade v. Montr......
-
Norris v. Walker
... ... 261, ... 263, 173 S.W. 707; Kohnle v. Paxton, 268 Mo. 463, ... 188 S.W. 155; Peter Piper Tailoring Co. v. Dobbin, ... 192 S.W. 1044; McBride v. Gurney (Mo. App.), 185 ... S.W. 735; Marcheck v. Klute, 133 Mo.App. 280, 113 ... S.W. 654; Glenn v. Hill, 210 Mo. 291, 109 S.W. 27, ... 16 ... ...
-
Norris v. Walker
...l.c. 263, 173 S.W. 707; Kohnle v. Paxton, 268 Mo. 463, 188 S.W. 155; Peter Piper Tailoring Co. v. Dobbins, 192 S.W. 1044; McBride v. Gurney (Mo. App.), 185 S.W. 735; Marcheck v. Klute, 133 Mo. App. 280, 113 S.W. 654; Glenn v. Hill, 210 Mo. 291, 109 S.W. 27, 16 L.R.A. (N.S.) 699.] The court ......