Watts v. Douglass

Decision Date31 July 1847
Citation10 Mo. 676
PartiesWATTS v. DOUGLASS.
CourtMissouri Supreme Court

APPEAL FROM HOWARD CIRCUIT COURT.

DAVIS, for Appellant, cited: Story on Bailments, 407; 5 Mass. R. 104; 12 Pick. 136; 3 Pick. 492.

CLARK, for Appellee, insists: 1. That the fact whether the horse was hired or loaned, as well as the place he was to be carried, was properly submitted to the jury by the instructions given by the court, and there being evidence, from which a jury might find either way, the verdict ought not to have been disturbed. This is a principle well settled by this court in various decisions. 2. That if Douglass borrowed the horse, he was bound for strict diligence, and the degree of diligence used, was a matter for the jury; so if he hired the horse, being then bound only for ordinary diligence, in either case, the jury, by their verdict decided in his favor. As to the nature of bailments, and the degrees of responsibility of bailees, see Story on Bailments, §§ 234-6-7 and 398.

McBRIDE, J.

Reuben Watts sued James A. Douglass before a justice of the peace, on an account for one bay horse worth $45, loaned or hired by the former to the latter, the horse having died whilst in Douglass' possession. Douglass obtained judgment before the justice, when Watts appealed to the Circuit Court, where judgment being against him, he has brought the case here by appeal. The bill of exceptions contains the evidence given upon the trial in the Circuit Court, and exhibits the following state of facts: Douglass applied to Watts for the hire of a horse, to drive in a buggy to Glasgow, about 12 miles distant. Watts consented to let him have one, provided he would not return on the same day; the horse was sent by Watts' son to Duglass about 8 o'clock in the morning, when the fact was made known to the son, that Douglass would drive the horse to Old Chariton, about two miles from Glasgow; and return on the same evening, when the son remarked, “feed and water the horse, when you get to Old Chariton.” Douglass left Fayette about half after eight o'clock in the morning, and reached Glasgow about twelve o'clock, when after a short stay he went to Chariton, where he had the horse put in the stable and fed, and remained until four o'clock in the afternoon, and then left for Fayette, traveling at the rate of from three to four miles the hour; proceeding about eight miles, the horse was taken sick, perspired very freely, was bled and drenched, and died that night.

At the close of the evidence, ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • First National Bank of Mexico v. Ragsdale
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • December 24, 1902
    ...of defendant. The appellate court will not disturb the verdict of the jury even if there is slight evidence to sustain it. Watts v. Douglass, 10 Mo. 676; Coudy Railroad, 85 Mo. 79; Price v. Evans, 49 Mo. 396; Rea v. Ferguson, 72 Mo. 225. (7) There was no error materially affecting the merit......
  • Culbertson v. Hill
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 31, 1885
    ...as to raise the presumption that the jury acted from prejudice, corruption or gross ignorance. Renick v. Walton, 7 Mo. 292; Watts v. Douglas, 10 Mo. 676; Reid v. Ins. Co., 58 Mo. 421; Hodges v. Black, 76 527. (4) Plaintiffs' instructions properly declared the law. It was competent for the j......
  • State v. Montgomery
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • October 31, 1876
    ...53 Mo. 234. Hockaday, Att'y Gen'l, for Respondent, cited: 3 Greenl. Ev. § 209; 4 Black. Com. 210; 1 Russ. Crimes, 675; 49 Mo. 396; 10 Mo. 676; 6 Mo. 211; State vs. Weber, 22 Mo. 325; State vs. Braunschweig, 36 Mo. 397; State vs. Saunders, 53 Mo. 236; Wagn. Stat. 1095, § 5; Beman vs. State, ......
  • Harrison v. Cachelin
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • March 31, 1858
    ...Penn. 252. Whittelsey, for respondent, cited Martin v. Whittington, 4 Mo. 518; Campbell v. Hood, 6 Mo. 211; 6 Mo. 250; 7 Mo. 220; Watts v. Douglas, 10 Mo. 676; 19 Mo. 307; State v. Anderson, 19 Mo. 246; Menkens v. Ovenhaus, 22 Mo. 70; Williams v. Dongan, 20 Mo. 186; 5 Metc. 173; 9 Mo. 477; ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT