Hogel v. Lindell
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. The Circuit Court was not authorized to charge the jury orally, without consent of parties —the act of 1838 not being repealed.
Read the full summary
ERROR to St. Louis Circuit Court. 1. The Circuit Court was not authorized to charge the jury orally, without consent of parties —the act of 1838 not being repealed. See acts 1838-9, page 27; Rev. Co. 1845, p. 362, sec. 19-20. 2. If oral instructions were not forbidden by law, those given are erroneous, because they have a direct tendency to embarrass and mislead the jury; because they so explain the written instructions as to submit to the jury the interpretation of a contract, and at the same time make the whole case depend on a single fact, which being found either way, the jury are…
1Opinion of the CourtScott, J.
This was an action of assumpsit brought by the plaintiff against the defendant in error for part of the consideration money of a lot alleged to have been sold and conveyed by the plaintiff to the defendant. The de*486claration also contained most of the common counts. Pleas, non-assumpsit and set-off. Upon the trial, the defendant obtained a verdict.
At the trial, a deed was produced by the defendant, on notice, and was read in evidence by the plaintiff. It is dated the 1st December, 1837, and is a conveyance by plaintiff to the defendant of the lot in the declaration mentioned, for the…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Swart v. ServiceNew York Supreme Court · 1839
3Cited by5 opinions
- Pogue v. SwinkSupreme Court of Missouri · 1953
- State ex rel. Nieman v. KochMissouri Court of Appeals · 1890
- Priest v. DeaverMissouri Court of Appeals · 1886
- Quick v. TurnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Shehy v. CunninghamOhio Supreme Court · 1909