Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri Volume 143

Reports of Cases Determined in the Supreme Court of the State of Missouri Volume 143

By (author) 

List price: US$22.40

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. 1898 edition. Excerpt: ... 653. (4) The contract sued on having been, without the consent of the Thueys, altered after its execution, can not be specifically enforced. Haskell 0. Champion, 30 Mo. 136; Evans o. Foreman, 60 Mo. 449; Bank 12. Armstrong, 62 Mo. 68; Bank v. Dunn, 62 Mo. 80; Moore o. Hutchinson, 79 Mo. 430; Bank 22. Fricke, 75 Mo. 178; Morrison 1;. Garth, 78 Mo. 434; llloore v. Bank, 22 Mo. App. 684; Horol o. Tanbman, 79 Mo. 101; Allen v. Dornan, 57 Mo. App. 288. (5) Counsel for plaintiffs in error define a material altera-V tion to be "such an one as causes the instrument to speak a language difierent in legal effect from that which it originally spoke." Tested by this rule, the alteration was material. Ringer v. Holtzelaw, 112 Mo. 522; Smith o. Shell, 82 Mo. 215. "Decided cases everywhere require that the memorandum should mention the price." 'illiams v. Morris, 95 U. S. 455; Grafton 22. ' Cummings, 99 U. S. 106; 1 Warvelle on Vendors, p.. 105, sec. 10; 1 Reed, Stat. Frauds, sec. 417; Waterman, Spec. Perf., sec. 146; Pomeroy, Spec. Perf., sec. 94; Fry, Spec. Perf., sec. 335; 8 Am. and Eng. Ency. of Law, p. 726. (6) The point that the answer should ' have been verified is not well taken. No such objection was presented to or decided by the trial court. Otherwise defendants in error could and doubtless would have verified their answer. The petition set out the contract sued on in exact words. Its terms were pleaded in no other manner. Defendants alleged an interlineation in the contract. Plaintiffs replied denying the new matter. N0 objection was made to the introduction of any evidence of the alteration. No motion was made for judgment on the pleadings. The motion for new trial did not specify any such ground of exception....show more

Product details

  • Paperback | 268 pages
  • 189 x 246 x 14mm | 485g
  • Rarebooksclub.com
  • United States
  • English
  • black & white illustrations
  • 1236975618
  • 9781236975614