Goins v. O'Keefe

3 Citing cases

  1. Midwest Lib. v. Structural Systems

    566 S.W.2d 249 (Mo. Ct. App. 1978)   Cited 10 times
    In Midwest Library Service, Inc. v. Structural Systems, Inc., 566 S.W.2d 249 (Mo.App. 1978) [3,4] we squarely held that deposing the witness made the witness "equally available" to both parties destroying the inference and its arguability.

    "... the fact that defendant's counsel did make argument to the jury on the issue of damages constituted waiver of any possible objection in this regard and in itself opened the way for plaintiff to argue the question of damages." See also Goins v. O'Keefe, 412 S.W.2d 513 (Mo.App. 1967). We, therefore, hold that plaintiff was wrongfully denied the opportunity in its closing argument to discuss the issue of damages and how it arrived at the amount of the prayer.

  2. McDowell v. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co.

    546 S.W.2d 160 (Mo. Ct. App. 1976)   Cited 17 times
    Holding telephone company liable for damages caused by a loud noise emitted by telephone because telephone company possesses superior knowledge or means of acquiring superior knowledge of cause of occurrence

    Plaintiff's doctor diagnosed the plaintiff's hearing condition as a mild to moderate sensory neuro hearing loss in the speech frequency range and positively stated that the condition was permanent and that there was no generally accepted course of curative treatment. We believe that through his own testimony concerning his hearing difficulties, and through that of his medical witness, the plaintiff did produce sufficient evidence to justify including future damages in Instruction No. 6. See Goins v. O'Keefe, 412 S.W.2d 513 (Mo.App. 1967). We therefore hold that no error was committed in submitting the damage instruction to the jury.

  3. Moore v. Quality Dairy Company

    425 S.W.2d 261 (Mo. Ct. App. 1968)   Cited 12 times

    We are of the opinion that this was proper subject for argument, recognizing that a vast discretion resides in the trial court in matters of this nature, and that counsel is allowed wide latitude in argument and in drawing inferences, even though the inferences drawn are illogical or erroneous. Triplett v. St. Louis Public Service Co., Mo.App., 372 S.W.2d 515; Eickmann v. St. Louis Public Service Co., Mo., 323 S.W.2d 802, 810; Griffith v. Gardner, 358 Mo. 859, 217 S.W.2d 519; Goins v. O'Keefe, Mo.App., 412 S.W.2d 513. Finally, defendants contend that conceding for the moment that the plaintiff made a submissible case against Quality Dairy Company, none however, was made against Defendant Freese as he could not be held liable for the furnishing of a truck with inadequate rearview mirrors.