Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

31 Mo. 574

Coover v. Moore & Walker

Supreme Court of Missouri

Decided March 15, 1862

Supreme Court of Missouri · decided 1862-03-15

Louis Circuit Court. This was an action brought upon the statute of damages. (R. C. 647, § 2.) The suit was commenced April 27, 1858, by petition in the circuit court of St. Louis county, the plaintiff alleging that her husband was killed by the negligence of the driver of defendant’s stage, and that he died June 5, 1857.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1862-03-15

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently August 2015

19 state decisions

701862187018801890190019101920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Bates, Judge,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2This was an action brought under the “ Act for the better security of life, property and character.” (R. C., p. 647.) The defendants were owners of a stage coach, and the husband of plaintiff, being a passenger in the coach, was killed through the negligence of the driver. The plaintiff brought this suit more than six months after the death of her husband, who left minor children. At the trial, in the St. Louis circuit court, instructions prayed by the defendants, that the *576lapse of time (six months) was a bar to the plaintiff’s action, were refused. The second section o£ the act provides that a suit may be maintained — First, by the husband or wife of the deceased ; or, second, if there be no husband or wife, or he or she fails to sue within six months after such death, then by the minor child or children of the deceased. The sixth section provides that every action instituted by virtue of the preceding sections of the act shall be commenced within one year after the cause of action shall accrue.

¶3From the fact that under this act only certain persons, presumed to be interested in the life of the deceased, may institute an action under it, and that there are large classes of persons whose lives are in no manner protected by the provisions of the act, it appears that the sum which may be recovered is not intended as a penalty, but as compensatory damages liquidated by the statute. There being thus no general right of recovery open to all persons representing the estate of the deceased or interested in his life, only such persons can recover in such time and in such manner as is set forth in the statute.

¶4The general limitation of time is “ one year after the cause of action shall accrue.” The cause of action of minor children accrues, in case there be a husband or wife, six months after the death ; in other cases it accrues at the death. The right of a wife accrues at the death of the husband, and generally she has one year within which to bring suit; if there be, however, minor children, their right of action accrues six months after the death, if the wife have then failed to sue; and the question is, has the wife then a right to sue concurrent with that of the minors ? We think not; for only the one sum can be recovered, and, therefore, only one suit prosecuted ; and the minors having undoubtedly the right, no such right can remain to the wife.

¶5Judgment reversed.

Judges Bay and Dryden concur.
/31/mo/574 · .json · Public domain