Peck v. Yale Amusement Co.

• Decision Date: 01 June 1917
• Docket Number: No. 18548.,18548.
• Citation: 195 S.W. 1033
• Parties: PECK v. YALE AMUSEMENT CO.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

195 S.W. 1033

PECK v. YALE AMUSEMENT CO.

No. 18548.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

June 1, 1917.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jackson County; William O. Thomas, Judge.

Action by Rosa Peck against the Yale Amusement Company. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Ellis, Cook & Barnett, of Kansas City, for appellant. Charles M. Bush and Roy W. Crimm, both of Kansas City, for respondent.

GRAVES, C. J.

Action for damage upon grounds of negligence. Defendant ran a picture show in Kansas City at 706 Main street, and plaintiff for several years had been a patron thereof. With the picture show was interspersed a vaudeville. The showroom consisted of a lower floor and a balcony. In the balcony the seats were arranged in rows, those at the back being higher than those in front. In other words, the balcony sloped from the rear to the front, or toward the stage. This necessitated a row of steps, downward from the rear to the front. Plaintiff seated herself in this balcony, and in departing therefrom by some kind of a misstep fell and was injured in the shoulder. She was an aged lady (60 years or more) doing a millinery business close (within a block or so) to this theater. From her testimony she seems to speak broken English, and her testimony is very unsatisfactory. The charge of negligence is thus stated in the petition:

"That the defendant carelessly and negligently constructed, built, and arranged said rooms, and on said evening carelessly and negligently lighted, operated, maintained, and used said room, which said carelessness and negligence consisted more particularly in this, that there was out in the aisles on the north side of the house, opposite plaintiff's seat, and slightly in front thereof, a break in the floor, or a step down, so illy lighted as to be unseen by plaintiff when she rose to leave her seat at the end of one of the acts; whether this opening in the floor was a broken place in the floor, plaintiff is unable to state for the reason that plaintiff did not see the same. But plaintiff does state that it was so dark that plaintiff could not with ordinary care see where she was stepping, and that the place was such when she stepped out into the aisle that the heel of her foot caught on the edge of the opening and the rest of her foot went on over, causing her, by reason of said negligent lighting and construction and maintenance, to be thrown down, or to fall upon the floor and into one of the aisles of said room, in consequence of which fall the bones of her shoulder were broken and fractured, splintered, bruised, and separated, and the ligaments, muscles, and tissues thereof were torn, separated, and bruised, and she was bruised and hurt upon her right side, limbs, and foot, and in consequence of all of which injuries she suffered, and still suffers, great bodily and mental pain...