Court Opinion

ID: 9643229
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 20:23:15.375952+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:58.562651
License: Public Domain

CONKLING, J.
(dissenting). For reasons hereinafter referred to I respectfully dissent from the conclusion of that portion of the principal opinion which considers the propriety of instruction 6, *267given at the request of plaintiff, and which rules that the trial court erred in giving that instruction.
The reasons for my dissent are fully stated by the St. Louis Court of Appeals in its consideration of the last paragraph of this instruction (224 S. W. (2d) 1. c. 578), and in the opinion of that court in Matthews [556] v. Mound City Cab Company, 205 S. W. (2d) 243, 250, 251. It is my view that the Court of Appeals in those cases correctly ruled the question. I would affirm the judgment from which the instant appeal was taken.