The St. Louis Republic. [volume] (St. Louis, Mo.) 1888-1919, 1904-03-16
In Case of Accident Compensa-
tion for Incapacity to Work
Is Limited.
APPELLATE COURT DEFINITION
Husband Is Entitled to Sue I'm
less She Does Separate
Labor'-Other De
cisions.

yesterday that a married woman is not
entitled to recover damages for being in
capacitated to work because of injuries,
unless she had been doing work other than
her regular household duties.
The decision was given in the case of
Mrs Elizabeth Kroner. who obtained
Judgment against the St Louis Transit
company for injuries sustained by being
thrown Off a car. The case was reversed
and remanded for another trial.
Presiding Judge Bland, who wrote the
opinion for the Appellate Court, said that
the Circuit Judge before whom the case
was Tried erred In instructing the Jury
that she could recover for being disabled
IN her capacity TO earn money, as the evil
oence did not show that she earned anv
money by separate labor.
SEPARATE LABOR DEFINED
What is meant under the law bv soma
rate labor, he said, is not the labor ex-
penueo oy Wife in the performance of
ner houSehold duties, but labor entirely
alsconnected with those duties and per-
wages. 'iioheS
=, Where the evidence shows nothing to
Ine contrary. he. said, the presumption is
lnat lhe household duties of the wife CON
stltute her ordinary vocation of life snd
band Gu iof her nus
Any injury to the wife resulting in die
ability to perform these services does les not
anorc her the right to recover for the
loss the Judge said. The loss is the t,nse
s,1a aS,d = loss; @ ana he alone is entitled to
JUDGES Reyburn and Goode concurred.
TRANSIT COMPANY WINS.
A decision Of the Circuit Court in favor
Oh the st. Louis Transit Company. which
was sued by W. W. Brewer for being
STUCK by brake handle. was affirmed
iPIewer, a passenger on car was stand
Sa. thg on the front platform when the acci-
Judge Bland. who wrote the ApneI,ata
court opinion, said 1t was Brewers duty
70 nave Kept out of the way of the brake
na,,nd wi Which the evidence showed he
C SouL9 nave done. Judges Reyburn and
me Appellate Court reversed the finding
OF the Circuit Court. awarding iudgmenf
against the Transit Company in favor nf
Jonn stocks, a conductor. who was In
1uTed through the fault of motorman.
Inc appellate Court affirmed the deci-
sion some time ago, and while a motion
LOT rehearing was pending the Supreme
Court decided In another case that tbe fell
y, ~ ew-servant law, under which the present
railways. W
Judge Goode wrote the Appellate Court
OPINION. which was concurred in by Judges
Bland and Reyburn.
The Appellate Court affirmed the deci-
sion of the Circuit Court, awarding iudg-
ment against the Transit Company in ia
yor Of Charles J.. Cornwell for a reward
LOT aTrestlng and prosecuting a person for
interfering with a car during the strike. /
The defense. was that Cornwell at the
time of the arrest was a member of the
posse comitatus, which was Organized To
preserve peace.
Judge Reyburn, who wrote the opinion
LOT me Appellate Court, held that. as
OF the case after he was discharged from
the posse, that he was entitled to the re-
ward. Judges Bland and Goode concurred.
Other decisions were:
By Judge Bland:
resp; Monroe COUNTY: affirmed for failure etc. etc.
MARY p stoddsrd app vs. 81 Louis and Mer-
versed and Temandsd. with direction: ei''' To-
Railway Company, app; Audrain County; af-
GarraEd ard, strods. etc. app. VS.. John NJ Beal
BY Judge Goode:
Greene D canny cssR rsfR sfrm.s ss 5S GOwdn
stPsS5fss Pfs5f Rsts.aPv soddard s cahty assa
Avenue and Clayton Railroad COMPANY. app.:
Buffalo Forge Company. resp, We cu,len &
STICK SifS Manufacturing Company ct al. app:
Guy. a1nTTneQ.
By Judge Reyburn:
BSeFF cPSbH cPsFns ainsd 6ssR y for .,s STARK
uon Company, app, vs.. Lee Montgomery ct
titled. anu GEL
Lettie McLeland resp, vs. St Louis rrans,,
company app: city; reversed and remanded
-osn II; Il; tIhtiahage app, VS.. Pierre Nagle,
Thomas B. Kitchens ct AL etc, resp. va 7
n Teasdale Commission Company, app; city;
The following motions were passed upon;
M T. Cunnally, administrator VS. r W
Pehle; motion to transfer overruled "
IL. Clay Neville VS.. H H. Hughes: respondent
allowed SIS for printing additional abstracts
William Troll VS.. George Sauerbrun. f1dR-
ment OF afhrmance is. motion of appellant
set tside and cause continued to October term |
W. e Elliott vs. Chicago and Alton Railway
Company; motion for rehearing sustained re-
hearing granted and cause set for reheariDK At |
foot of March docket. q"
Andrew J. Martin VS.. Lee T. Witty. rnotton |
foI rehearinR overruled.
J. K Crow vs. L F. Williams: motion for |
overruled
Bridget Jordan, adrnx.. VS.. Chicago and Alton
Railway Company; motion for rehearing over
ruled.
c. A. Torreyson, resp. Vs. Alexander Thorn |
oaugh. deft: W. r. Luster. interpleadter app: |
notion for reheartng overruled and appellant |
allowed $3.50 for printing abstracts
Earnestine jacobson VS.. st. Louis Transit |
Company: motion for rehearing sustained re- |
docket.