Unterlachner v. Wells
Decision Date | 01 July 1925 |
Docket Number | No. 25036.,25036. |
Citation | 278 S.W. 79 |
Parties | UNTERLACHNER v. WELLS. |
Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court; Wilson A. Taylor, Judge.
Action by Alois Unterlachner against Rolla Wells, receiver of the United Railways Company of St. Louis. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiff appeals. Reversed, and remanded for new trial.
W. H. Douglass, of St. Louis, for appellant.
Charles W. Bates, T. D. Francis, and Ernest A. Green, all of St. Louis, for respondent.
Action for personal injuries. The plaintiff was struck and injured by an east-bound street car, operated and run by defendant upon Arsenal street in the city of St. Louis. The accident occurred at the intersection of Arsenal street and Macklind avenue. With some slight modifications, the respondent agrees to appellant's statement of facts. In respondent's brief it is said:
We shall not overlook these additional suggestions in the course of the opinion. The appellant's statement is as follows:
The petition contained four grounds of alleged negligence, but in submitting the case, the plaintiff abandoned all except the alleged excessive speed of the car in violation of the speed ordinance of the city of St. Louis, which limited the speed of a street car at the point of accident to 15 miles per hour. Appellant says that he only urges error in the giving of certain instructions given by the court for the defendant. Defendant pleaded contributory negligence, and now urges that the judgment is right and for the right party and should be sustained upon this ground of contributory negligence, although there may be error in the instructions given for defendant. They urge that there was no error in the instructions, however. Upon trial before the court and a jury there was a verdict for defendant, and judgment was entered in accordance with the verdict. From such judgment this appeal is taken. Other matters are left to the opinion.
I. The first vital question, so far as the defendant is concerned, is whether or not the plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law. If so, the judgment is for the right party, and mere error in the instructions would not help plaintiff upon this appeal. If plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law, he had no case for the jury at all, and mere error in defendant's instructions would not help him in any way. For the defendant there was no evidence except a witness who...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Doherty v. St. Louis Butter Co.
...instruction is in the nature of a lecture to the jury, and such instructions are improper. Brown v. Wheelock, 83 S.W.2d 911; Unterlachner v. Wells, 278 S.W. 79. (f) Because instruction, in directing a verdict for respondent if appellant's conduct was the sole cause of his injuries, and said......
-
Koebel v. Tieman Coal & Material Co.
... ... conflicting and calculated to mislead, rather than enlighten, ... the jury. Cases under Point 2, supra; Unterlachner v ... Wells, 278 S.W. 79. (b) Instruction 9 injected a totally ... false and foreign issue into the case, thereby misleading and ... confusing ... ...
-
Waeckerley v. Colonial Baking Co.
... ... 55, 101 Mo.App ... 163; Glenn v. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co., 150 S.W ... 1092, 167 Mo.App. 109; Vernon v. Rife, 294 S.W. 747; ... Wells v. Lusk, 173 S.W. 750, 188 Mo.App. 63. (2) The ... court erred in giving Instruction No. 2, directing the jury ... that they should not be ... Johnson v. St. Louis Ry. Co. (Mo.), 73 S.W. 173, ... 177; Fletcher v. Kansas City Rys. Co. (Mo. App.), ... 221 S.W. 1070, 1072; Unterlachner v. Wells (Mo.), ... 278 S.W. 79, 83. (3) It is prejudicial and reversible error ... to comment, over the objection of the opposite party, to the ... ...
-
Morris v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.
... ... the jury at the request of the defendants instructions 7 and ... 8 in combination. Unterlachner v. Wells, 278 S.W ... 79; Wolfson v. Cohen, 55 S.W.2d 677; Mengel v ... St. Louis, 111 S.W.2d 5. (8) The court committed ... reversible ... ...