Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Citation
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Parent Document
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Jurisdiction
- Missouri (state)
- Effective Date
- 1921-07-23
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/3550984/roman-v-king/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (44)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
- Roman v. King, 233 S.W. 161 (1921)
Full Text
673 charsIt is a principle too well established to be now thoughtlessly abandoned that one who invites another to come upon his premises is bound in law to see that those premises are in such condition that the invitation may be safely accepted. In this case the lease was an invitation to the plaintiff to enter the flat by the way already apparently provided. In return the owner exacted a monthly rental. She could only enter by crossing *Page 654 his own premises by the use of the steps that gave way under her feet, and she was entitled to have them maintained so that she could do so in safety. Her rights under the lease constituted the measure of his duty in that respect.