Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co. v. Woodson

Citations

• 79 Kan. 567
• 100 P. 633
• 1909 Kan. LEXIS 242

Syllabus

<p>SYLLABUS BY THE COURT.</p> <p>1. Practice, District Court—Instructions. Where the law relating to a particular subject is- of vital importance in the trial of an action the court should clearly state in its instructions to the jury all the law necessary to explain fully the point in controversy, and not submit to the jury for their determination any of the legal questions involved.</p> <p>2. -Same. Where upon the trial of an action it becomes necessary for the jqry to decide whether or not an act conceded to be wrongful was justified by the existence of probable cause, the definition of that term, and the rules by which it must be ascertained, should be fully and clearly stated to the jury in the instructions of the court.</p> <p>3. Criminal Law—Arrest without a Warrant—Unlawful Detention—Probable Cause. A passenger, while quietly and peaceably seated on a railway-train, was arrested and imprisoned by the conductor of the train, without a warrant or other legal authority. The passenger afterward commenced an action against the railway company to recover damages for such false arrest and imprisonment. The sole defense made to the action by the railway company was that the conductor, at the time the arrest was made, had probable cause for believing that the passenger arrested had a short time before committed a felony, by feloniously cutting and stabbing a porter of that train with intent to kill him. The railway company requested the district court to instruct the jury upon the question of probable cause, as stated in instructions presented. The court denied the request, and failed to give any instruction upon that subject. Held, error.</p>