George Robb Ellison

The case involved Walter Charles, who was charged with carrying a concealed loaded automatic pistol in violation of Section 564.610 RSMo 1949. The state sought enhanced punishment under the Habitual Criminal Act (Section 556.280) based on three prior convictions, two of which were alleged to have been served concurrently and from which the defendant was discharged before the current offense. The jury found the defendant guilty of the charged offense and that he had been previously convicted of a felony, imposing the maximum two-year prison term. The appellate court affirmed, reasoning that the verdict adequately referenced the prior convictions in generic terms, the information properly alleged the necessary facts including discharge from the concurrent sentences, and claimed errors regarding jury instructions and closing arguments lacked merit.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved plaintiff Rucker, a railroad lineman, who suffered a back injury in 1950 when a fellow worker dropped an 8-foot crossarm onto his safety belt while working on a pole near the McKinley Bridge, leading to a herniated lumbar disc that required surgery. Rucker sued the Illinois Terminal Railroad for damages under what appears to be a negligence or FELA claim, and after a jury verdict of $75,000 the trial court ordered a remittitur reducing it to $45,000. The appellate court affirmed the reduced judgment, reasoning that evidence supported findings of ongoing pain and likely need for further surgery despite Rucker returning to work and earning comparable wages, and that trial issues such as counsel's arguments regarding uncalled doctors and admission of certain evidence did not constitute reversible error.

torts & liabilitylabor & employment

This case concerned a dispute over an old curved road crossing the defendant's land, which the plaintiffs sought to keep open via injunction on the theory that it had become a public road through long-term prescriptive use by the public. The trial court granted the injunction, finding the road qualified as public under Missouri's 1887 prescription statute due to continuous adverse use and public maintenance. On appeal, the Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the evidence showed only permissive use rather than the required adverse, continuous, and hostile public use for the statutory period, and that the road had been abandoned after a new straight public road was established in 1903. The Supreme Court addressed related procedural issues, including mootness after the plaintiffs sold the land during the litigation without substituting parties, but upheld the core determination that no public road existed and the defendant could fence it off.

propertyprocedure

This case involved a suit by contract purchasers Drake for specific performance of a written agreement to buy real estate in St. Louis from owner Hicks, with Parker and Matthews as purported lessees. After a first appeal reversed an initial decree, the trial court reinstated an interlocutory order requiring the Drakes to deposit funds and notes, then entered a final decree vesting title in them and canceling the leases, which the court found were fraudulently backdated by Hicks to obstruct the sale. Hicks appealed again after the trial court granted him a new trial without stating reasons. The Supreme Court of Missouri held that the Drakes had complied with the prior mandate, the new trial grant was erroneous under procedural rules requiring specified grounds, and the decree should be reinstated in their favor.

propertyprocedure

This case involved a will contest by collateral relatives of Margaret J. Rendlen, who died in 1948, challenging her 1939 will on grounds that she later altered bequest amounts in paragraphs 2 and 3 without reattestation, potentially revoking it under Missouri statute, or alternatively that she lacked capacity or was unduly influenced. The trial court admitted the original will to probate, and after a jury found no incapacity or undue influence, upheld the pre-alteration terms. The appellate court affirmed, reasoning that the changes were partial and inoperative due to lack of reattestation, but under the doctrine of dependent relative revocation the original bequest amounts remained effective as the testatrix intended the will to stand with only those modifications. The court noted the alterations were evident from the document itself, including overwritten figures, but did not constitute complete revocation.

propertyfamily law

In this 1953 Missouri case, plaintiff Oshins sued the St. Louis Public Service Company for $10,000 in damages after sustaining injuries in a collision between the car he was riding in and one of the defendant's buses at a street intersection. The plaintiff's petition alleged multiple negligent acts by the bus driver, including operating at an excessive speed of 40-50 mph under wet, downgrade conditions. The jury returned a verdict for the defendant, and the plaintiff appealed, arguing that the defendant's converse jury instruction was improper because it failed to detail all the factual circumstances rather than simply negating the claim of excessive speed. The Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the judgment, holding that because the plaintiff's negligence allegations were pleaded conjunctively, the defendant was not required to restate all collateral facts in its converse instruction and could instead submit a negative finding on the speed issue alone, as the defendant did not bear the burden of proof.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case was a wrongful death action brought by plaintiff Wilt against defendant Moody (after a settlement with co-defendant McMillan) seeking damages for the death of Wilt's wife in a highway collision. The jury returned a verdict for Moody, but the Missouri Supreme Court reversed and remanded for a new trial. The court held that the trial judge erred by allowing the reading of Moody's written statement to the jury, by directing the jury to disregard certain testimony on medical expenses, and by giving an overly elaborate instruction on the plaintiff's burden of proof that risked confusing the jury. These evidentiary and instructional rulings required reversal despite the jury's finding.

torts & liabilityprocedure

In Carr v. Carr, a wife obtained a divorce decree awarding her $10,000 in alimony in gross along with release of certain property claims, and the husband appealed without posting a supersedeas bond. While the appeal was pending, the wife obtained execution and purchased the husband's land at the resulting sale. The Supreme Court of Missouri had previously affirmed the divorce but reduced the alimony to $6,000 with conditions on the wife's release of claims, and the trial court entered a modified judgment accordingly. On the husband's later motion to set aside the execution sale, the court held that the sale was premature and invalid because the appeal had suspended operation of the original decree, so the wife did not acquire title, though she could pursue a new execution for the reduced alimony amount.

family lawpropertyprocedure

The case involved a workers' compensation claim by the widow and minor children of Herman Lardge, an employee at Concrete Products Manufacturing Co., who was killed at work when a coworker struck him with an iron rod during an argument over accusations of stealing wine. The Industrial Commission and trial court denied benefits, finding the death did not arise out of and in the course of employment under Missouri's Workmen's Compensation Law. On appeal, the Missouri Supreme Court affirmed, reasoning that the assault stemmed from a personal quarrel unrelated to the job duties or workplace conditions, as no wine was permitted on the premises and the incident lacked a reasonable connection to the employment. The court distinguished broader interpretations from other jurisdictions and emphasized that Missouri precedents require the injury to have a direct relation to the work, which was not present here based on the facts.

labor & employment

The case involved eight fire insurance policies totaling $59,500 issued on a building in St. Louis, with coverage running to the trustee in a deed of trust 'as his interest may appear.' After the building was destroyed by fire, the insurance companies sought a declaratory judgment and reformation of the policies, claiming they had intended to insure only the mortgagee's interest and were entitled to subrogation against the property owner and mortgagor under policy provisions allowing recovery from the mortgagor to the extent of payments made to the mortgagee. The court held that the policies as written covered the interests of both the mortgagor and mortgagee through the trustee, that the owner had paid the premiums with the understanding of full coverage, and that the insurers had no right to subrogation or reformation. The decision rested on the circumstances of policy procurement, the parties' mutual intent, and the fact that the trustee represented both interests under the deed of trust.

propertybusiness & regulatory

In State v. Morris, the defendant was convicted of second-degree murder after shooting and killing John Mack Nolen during an argument over a bet in a crap game, with the defense raising claims of insanity and self-defense. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the life sentence, rejecting challenges to the admission of a photograph of the victim's body (deemed admissible given the lack of factual admissions at trial), alleged errors in insanity instructions (not properly preserved in the motion for new trial), the omission of a specific verdict form for insanity, improper closing arguments, and the sufficiency of evidence on sanity. The court reasoned that the evidence, including the defendant's confession and witness testimony, presented factual questions for the jury and that no reversible procedural or evidentiary errors occurred under applicable Missouri statutes and precedents.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved the conviction of a 26-year-old Navy veteran for forcible rape under Missouri law, based on an incident where he allegedly entered a woman's car at a railroad station, forced her to drive to a remote area, and committed the assault at gunpoint. The defendant appealed his 40-year sentence, raising issues such as improper jury separation, exclusion and admission of evidence including his confession, prejudicial judicial comments, and excessive punishment. The Missouri Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not err in its evidentiary rulings or handling of the jury, that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict despite conflicting accounts, and that the sentence was within the statutory range which allowed up to the death penalty. The court rejected claims of perjury or coercion affecting the outcome and found no basis for reversal on the assigned errors.

criminal law

The case involved a lawsuit by plaintiff Brumback against defendant Simpson for $15,000 in damages arising from personal injuries sustained in a nighttime automobile collision at what was treated as an intersection on Highway 40 in Jackson County, Missouri. Plaintiff was driving west when defendant's car crossed northbound from an open area south of the highway, resulting in a collision. The trial court entered judgment for the plaintiff, and on appeal the defendant argued that the plaintiff was contributorily negligent as a matter of law for failing to maintain a lateral lookout and that the plaintiff's verdict-directing instruction was too general. The Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the judgment, holding that the evidence did not establish contributory negligence as a matter of law and that the instruction adequately required findings on the defendant's negligence in entering the highway when it was not clear of approaching vehicles.

torts & liabilityprocedure

This case arose from a land tax foreclosure suit under Missouri's Land Tax Collection Law to recover over $23,000 in delinquent taxes on a Kansas City apartment building, resulting in a default judgment and sale to the Land Trust after unsuccessful public auctions. A third party who acquired the owner's title for $2,500 later sought to vacate the judgment and redeem the property via a reduced tax compromise approved by local officials, but the motion was filed without notice to the Land Trust and contained misleading statements. The Supreme Court of Missouri addressed challenges to the validity of the Land Tax Collection Act, holding that it does not conflict with constitutional provisions on county organization because the Land Trust is an independent public corporation serving multiple tax districts statewide rather than an arm of county government.

taxesproperty

The case involved a railroad worker who sued his employer after falling 16 feet from a bridge while repairing it in 1948, sustaining serious back injuries including a ruptured disc. The railroad conceded negligence but appealed the $40,000 judgment (after a $5,000 remittitur from the jury's $45,000 verdict), arguing errors in admitting expert medical testimony based on X-rays taken nearly two years later, an improper hypothetical question on damages, and that the award was excessive due to jury prejudice. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that the expert opinions had sufficient probative value regarding trauma-related injuries, that supporting evidence for the hypothetical was adequately supplied at trial, and that the reduced award was reasonable given the plaintiff's age, ongoing pain, disability from manual labor, and comparison to similar precedents. Evidentiary and damages rulings were upheld without finding misconduct or excessiveness.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved the first-degree murder conviction and death sentence of defendant Johnson for shooting and killing Overland police officer Pelham Scott after Johnson was arrested for driving a stolen car with a makeshift ignition device and then seized the officer's revolver during booking at the station. On appeal, Johnson challenged the sufficiency of the evidence and raised multiple claims of trial error, focusing especially on the prosecutor's jury argument that allegedly commented on Johnson's failure to testify, in violation of a state statute prohibiting such references. The Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the conviction, holding that the motion for new trial failed to meet specificity requirements, the evidence was sufficient, and the prosecutor's statements did not amount to an improper reference to the defendant's silence. A dissenting opinion argued that the arguments did violate the statutory prohibition.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved the conviction of George Carlyle Taylor for felonious assault with a deadly weapon, a razor, upon his wife Agnes Taylor with intent to kill, in violation of Missouri statute, resulting in a five-year prison sentence. The defendant appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the information due to clerical errors naming the victim incorrectly and lack of proper signing or verification, as well as the adequacy of the evidence, jury instructions on presumption of innocence and accident, and the prosecutor's argument. The court held that the information was valid under statutes excusing surplusage or repugnant allegations that do not prejudice the defendant, that deficiencies in verification were waived by failing to object before trial, and that the evidence supported the verdict while the instructions and argument were proper. All assignments of error in the motion for new trial were rejected, leading to affirmance of the judgment.

criminal lawprocedure

This case was a wrongful death action under Missouri statutes seeking $15,000 in damages after a passenger train struck the deceased's pickup truck at a rural grade crossing, killing him. The jury awarded the plaintiff administratrix $6,000, and the Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the judgment after transfer from the Court of Appeals. The court held that the evidence was sufficient to submit the case to the jury on the humanitarian doctrine theory of negligence, specifically the engineer's failure to give a timely warning and to slacken the train's speed, even though testimony conflicted on whether a warning was audible in time. It further reasoned that the plaintiff was entitled to present evidence on both primary negligence and the humanitarian doctrine without being required to abandon one theory.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved two non-union Missouri cafeteria corporations suing union officers and agents for an alleged conspiracy involving picketing and boycotts that violated common law and state anti-trust laws, seeking an injunction. The trial court dismissed the suit at the close of the plaintiffs' evidence, but the appellate court reversed and remanded, holding that the evidence did not justify an injunction against the picketing at the time of trial but did establish an illegal boycott of suppliers before and at the time the suit was filed. The court reasoned that the picketing was substantially peaceful and protected under free speech principles despite isolated incidents, while threats to suppliers like dairies and egg providers to stop deliveries amounted to an unlawful boycott that warranted further proceedings. The court also addressed evidentiary and procedural issues for retrial, including the scope of cross-examination and admissibility of certain exhibits.

labor & employmentfree speechbusiness & regulatory

In Timmerman v. Terminal RR Ass'n of St. Louis, a switchman sued his employer railroad under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act for injuries sustained when he was struck by a passing locomotive on a parallel track while alighting from a switch engine to operate a track switch. The plaintiff alleged negligence in maintaining an unsafe workspace due to the narrow clearance between tracks, failing to warn of the approaching train, and not stopping the switch engine. The trial court entered judgment on a $35,000 jury verdict for the plaintiff, and the appellate court affirmed, holding that the evidence supported the jury's findings on liability and that the damages award was not excessive in light of the plaintiff's permanent injuries and reduced earning capacity.

labor & employmenttorts & liability