Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 98

Cases Determined by the St. Louis, Kansas City and Springfield Courts of Appeals of the State of Missouri Volume 98

List price: US$22.39

Currently unavailable

Add to wishlist

AbeBooks may have this title (opens in new window).

Try AbeBooks

Description

This historic book may have numerous typos and missing text. Purchasers can usually download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. Not indexed. Not illustrated. 1903 edition. Excerpt: ...will only consider the grounds specified in the order granting a new trial. Milling Co. v. Transit Co., 122 Mo. 258; R. S. 1899, sec. 801. (2 ) Respondents' answer does contain sutficient negation of the warranty set out in the answer and is good especially so when not taken advantage of by motion or demurrer in the regular way. An objection to the introduction of testimony can only be interposed when the petition or answer fails to state a cause of action or defense and if the defense is such that it would be cured by a verdict it should be taken advantage of by motion or demurrer in the regular way. Lycett v. Wolff, 45 Mo. App. 489; Marshall v. Ferguson, 78 Mo. App. 645; Hurst v. Ash Grove, 96 Mo. 168; Young v. Iron Co., 103 Mo. 324. (3) On the objection to the introduction of evidence in the nature of an oral demurrer, every reasonable intendment should be indulged in favor of the pleader. I-Iatten v. Randall, 48 Mo. App. 203; Donaldson v. Butler Co., 98 Mo. 163; Young v. Iron Co., 103 Mo. 324; Biddle on War. on Sale of Cl1at., secs. 1 and 2; Danford v. Crookshanks, 68 Mo. App. 311; Implement Co. v. Leonard, 40 Mo. App. 477. ELLISON, J.--This action is based on five nonnegotiable promissory notes. The verdict of the jury"in the trial court was for plaintiff. Whereupon, _defendants filed a motion for new trial which was sustained, and thereupon plaintifi appealed. The notes were given to the Seevers Manufacturing Company in part payment of a "steam drilling outfit," and they were assigned to plaintiff. The answer, as claimed by defendant, set up a warranty of the machinery and a failure of warranty. Plaintiff's view, as expressed in his brief, is, that the answer did "not contain a negation of the...show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 244 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 13mm | 440g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236810759
  • 9781236810755