Opinion

Williams v. Schaff

  • 282 Mo. 497
  • 222 S.W. 412
  • 1920 Mo. LEXIS 131
Court
Supreme Court of Missouri
Filed
Jun 2, 1920
Status
Published
Author
Graves
On the bench
Goode, Blair, Woodson, Graves
Cited by
9 cases

The opinion

GRAVES, J.

(dissenting). — I dissent in this case, because the plaintiff’s evidence (in ’my judgment) fails to make a case either at common law, or under the Federal Act. I agree with my learned brother in his reasoning as to there being no showing of liability under the Federal Act. But I am of opinion that neither Hughes nor plaintiff was about the master’s business at the time of the accident. The evidence as to their reason for . the trip to McAlester is entirely too shadowy to form the basis of liability. The necessity of such a trip is not sufficiently shown. It is highly improbable that these two.men could not have found food and lodging at or

*521

near their place of work. At least it is clear that plaintiff made no effort so to do, and was in no position to show necessity for his trip.

Other suggestions might be made, but ,these will suffice. I therefore dissent.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.