Stater v. City of Joplin
Citation | 176 S.W. 241,189 Mo. App. 383 |
Decision Date | 08 May 1915 |
Docket Number | No. 1494.,1494. |
Parties | STATER v. CITY OF JOPLIN. |
Court | Court of Appeal of Missouri (US) |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Jasper County; David E. Blair, Judge.
Action by Martha J. Stater against the City of Joplin. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
Byron H. Coon, T. C. Tadlock, and C. V. Buckley, all of Joplin, for appellant. E. F. Cameron, of Joplin, for respondent.
The trial court sustained a general demurrer to plaintiff's petition, on which the plaintiff stood, and brings her appeal to this court, alleging error in holding" that she could not recover on the facts stated. Counsel for plaintiff have made a fair statement of the case as alleged, and we adopt it:
Plaintiff in her brief has abandoned the charge of negligence as to the carelessness of the agent or officer in driving the machine in a negligent manner, but contends that the city is responsible for using an automobile patrol which was known by the city officials to be out of order, worn, and defective to such an extent that the driver could not operate it with reasonable safety on the streets of Joplin.
The rule is declared in the case of Bullmaster v. City of St. Joseph, 70 Mo. App. 60, that a municipality is acting in its governmental capacity and for the "greater public" when exercising the delegated power of preserving the public peace and good order or suppressing vice and immorality, and that:
"When agents of the `greater public' are guilty of nonfeasance or misfeasance in the exercise of any one of the former class of powers, the principles of the maxim of respondeat superior do not apply, but the maxim does apply when the agents of the lesser public are guilty of nonfeasance or misfeasance in the exercise of the latter class of powers."
This case is quoted from with approval in Barree v. City of Cape Girardeau, 197 Mo. loc. cit. 389, 390, 95 S. W. 330, 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1090, 114 Am. St. Rep. 763.
In the case of McKenna v. City of St. Louis. 6 Mo. App. 320, it is declared that a city cannot be held for defects and insufficiencies in its fire apparatus, which, because of such defects, strikes and injures a citizen standing on a sidewalk in the city, because it is held that, in the exercise of this power, the city is acting in its governmental capacity. This case likewise, and the rule announced, is approved in the following cases: Boothe v. City of Fulton, 85 Mo. App. loc. cit. 19; State ex rel. Abel v. Gates, 190 Mo. loc. cit. 558, 89 S. W. 881, 2 L. R. A. (N. S.) 152; Donahoe v. Kansas City, 136 Mo. loc. cit. 665, 38 S. W. 571; Barree v. City of Cape Girardeau, 197 Mo. loc. cit. 389, 95 S. W. 330, 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1090, 114 Am. St. Rep. 763. In the Cape Girardeau Case (last cited) the city was held because of a wrong done by one of its servants while acting for the city in performing a ministerial function. In Ulrich v. City of St. Louis, 112 Mo. 138, 20 S. W. 466, 34 Am. St. Rep. 372, and in Wilks v. City of Caruthersville, 162 Mo. App. 492, 142 S. W. 800, the same principle is announced.
In dealing with this question the Supreme Court in Cassidy v. City of St. Joseph, 247 Mo. loc. cit. 207, 152 S. W. 306, used this language:
street sweepers, with the vehicles and employés that gather the dirt, are all agencies of the ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
City of Meridian v. Beeman
... ... Hastings, 25 Pa. S.Ct. 596; Shultz v ... Milwaukee, 49 Wis. 245, 5 N.W. 342, 35 Am. Rep. 779; ... Clark v. Atlantic, 180 F. 598; Stater v ... Joplin, 189 Mo.App. 383, 176 S.W. 241; Evans v ... Berry, 186 N.E. 205; Aldrich v. Youngstown, 140 ... N.E. 164, 27 A. L. R. 1498; Christ ... ...
-
Pearson v. Kansas City
...1123; 43 C.J. 964, sec. 1745; 43 C.J. 1167, sec. 1932. Missouri decisions denying liability in governmental functions. Stater v. Joplin, 189 Mo. App. 383, 176 S.W. 241; Ulrich v. St. Louis, 112 Mo. 138; Cunningham v. St. Louis, 96 Mo. 53; Kruger v. Board of Education, 310 Mo. 248, 274 S.W. ......
-
Pearson v. Kansas City
...v. St. Louis, 6 Mo.App. 320, l. c. 321; Bullin v. Moberly, 131 Mo.App. 172; Barree v. Cape Girardeau, 132 Mo.App. 182; Stater v. Joplin, 189 Mo.App. 383, 176 S.W. 241; Hawkins v. City of Springfield, 194 Mo.App. 151, S.W. 576; Russell v. Devon, 2 T. R. 667, 100 Eng. Reprint 359, 1 Revised R......
-
Auslander v. St. Louis, 29992.
...functions. Healy v. Kansas City, 277 Mo. 619; Zummo v. Kansas City, 285 Mo. 222; Behrman v. St. Louis, 273 Mo. 578; Stater v. Joplin, 189 Mo. App. 383; Cassidy v. St. Joseph, 247 Mo. 197; McKenna v. St. Louis, 6 Mo. App. 320; Seibert v. Railroad, 188 Mo. 657. (2) The regulation of traffic b......