Houts v. Dunham
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — lion. Matt G. Reynolds, Judge. (1) The court erred in allowing plaintiff to recover upon a theory different from that set forth in the petition.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — lion. Matt G. Reynolds, Judge. (1) The court erred in allowing plaintiff to recover upon a theory different from that set forth in the petition. The petition is for money had and received, which action will only lie for a specific sum, Cliitty Contracts, 76 (1890); 1 Chitty Plead., star p. 364; Douglass v. Skinner, 44 Conn. 338; Maxwell v. Longenecke, 82 111. 308; Gillman v. Waterville, 59' Me. 491; Yan Hoesen v. State Convention, 16 Minn. 9‘6i; Glasscock v. Hazel, 109 N. C. 145; Robins v. Ins. Co., 12 Mo. 381; Deal v. Bank, 79 Mo. App. 262; Clark…
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
This is a suit for money had and received. Plaintiff recovered and defendant prosecutes the appeal. The action was instituted and judgment given against George P. B. Jackson as defendant in his lifetime. Since the appeal was perfected, Mr. Jackson departed this life and the cause has been revived and now proceeds against his administrator, Harvey G. Dunham. Plaintiff is a member of the bar, engaged in the practice of his profession at Warrens-burg, Missouri, and during his lifetime Mr. Jackson was a member of the bar engaged in the practice of law, first at Sedalia and afterward in St. Louis.…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Clifford Banking Co. v. Donovan Commission Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Hall v. MarstonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1822
- Huston v. TylerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Hammond v. BeesonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Crigler v. DuncanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Hilderbrand v. AndersonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1954
- Early v. Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1912
- Himmelberger-Harrison Lumber Co. v. DallasMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912