Reddick v. Newburn
Decision Date | 31 October 1882 |
Parties | REDDICK v. NEWBURN, Appellant. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from Andrew Circuit Court.--HON. H. S. KELLEY, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
C. F. Boogher and W. W. Caldwell for appellant.
Sanders & Mercer for respondent.
Defendant had possession and control of a pasture in which about fifty head of stock belonging to himself and others, were pastured. This stock broke down the fences dividing the pasture from the adjacent cornfields and entered said fields and destroyed the crops of the plaintiff. Judgment was rendered against the defendant for the entire damage.
The defendant contends that he is liable only for the damage done by his own cattle.
Where cattle are straying upon the commons, or are otherwise at large, and break through a lawful fence and destroy crops, each owner is separately liable for the injury done by his cattle. Partenheimer v. Van Order, 20 Barb. 479; Van Steenburgh v. Tobias, 17 Wend. 562; Auchmuty v. Ham, 1 Denio 495; Chipman v. Palmer, 77 N. Y. 51. But where cattle are placed in the possession of another for agistment, the person having the absolute ownership is not liable for injuries done by them, but the agister is alone liable, unless the owner purposely selected an irresponsible or incompetent or untrustworthy bailee, in which event, he, also, would be liable. Judge Cooley, in his work on Torts, page 340, says: Vide also Rossell v. Cottom, 31 Pa. St. 525; Ward v. Brown, 64 Ill. 307, and Cook v. Morea, 33 Ind. 497.
This rule of the common law is not repealed by section 5653, Revised Statutes, making the owner liable for damages, where his cattle break into any inclosure having a fence of the height required by section 5652. Section 5653, as will be seen from an examination of the entire act, applies only to exterior fences. Similar enactments have been thus construed in other states. Johnson v. Wing, 3 Mich. 163; Brady v. Ball, 14 Ind. 317; Cook v. Morea, 33 Ind. 497; Herold v. Meyers, 20 Iowa 378; Cooley on Torts, 338. Other provisions are made in the act in regard to partition fences, and double damages are given for injuries resulting from a failure to keep them up. r. S., § 5661. Besides, it is not to be supposed that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Stein v. Mercantile Home Bank & Trust Co.
-
Peniston v. Hydraulic Press Brick Co.
... ... the suit, though the interest of the separate defendants are ... otherwise unconnected, still they may be joined. Reddick ... v. Newburn, 76 Mo. 423; Michael v. City of St ... Louis, 112 Mo. 616; Donavan v. Dunning, 69 Mo ... 438; Story Eq. Plead., sec. 285, ... ...
-
Elvins v. Elvins
... ... 522; Carter v. Tallant, 51 ... Kan. 516; Chaffin v. Fulkerson, 95 Ky. 277; ... Pendleton v. Pendleton, 112 S.W. 674; Redick v ... Newburn, 76 Mo. 423; Gant v. Railroad, 79 Mo ... 502; Blunt v. Railroad, 55 Mo. 157; Witting v ... Railroad, 28 Mo.App. 103; McCubrey v. Lankis, ... 74 ... ...
-
Asher v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.
...619; and the objection to the jurisdiction of the circuit court, the defendant having appeared and gone to trial, is settled in Reddick v. Newburn, 76 Mo. 423. The objection the evidence was insufficient is frivolous. The case was fully proven. Whether the evidence was or was not sufficient......