Edwards v. Smith
Supreme Court of Missouri
Jlppeal from, Buchanan Circuit Court. * I. The testimony of Catharine Edwards contradicted the written contract, and was improper. (Greenl. Ev., 8th ed., §§ 275, Bunce vs. Beck, 48 Mo. 266 ; Murdock vs. Ganahl, 47 Mo. 137.) II.
Read the full summary
Jlppeal from, Buchanan Circuit Court. * I. The testimony of Catharine Edwards contradicted the written contract, and was improper. (Greenl. Ev., 8th ed., §§ 275, Bunce vs. Beck, 48 Mo. 266 ; Murdock vs. Ganahl, 47 Mo. 137.) II. The evidence shows that the consideration, if any, for the agreement of McAllister to pay the $700 was, that McAllister was to have a half interest in the patent, and he had therefore a right to show that the invention was worthless, and that the consideration of the contract had failed. (Jolliffe vs. Collins, 21 Mo. 339 ; Dickerson vs. Hall, 14 Pick. 220 ; Lowell vs.…
1Opinion of the CourtNapton, Judge
This action originated in the probate court of Andrew county. The claim presented there was based on an instrument of writing, signed by both plaintiff and defendant, and the amount of $726.80 was allowed the claimant. An appeal was taken to the circuit court of Andrew county, and, by change of venue, was transferred to Buchanan.
It is difficult to understand the case without a literal copy of the written contract, which, being evidently the work of an illiterate person, disregards all rules of syntax and orthography, and is, moreover, somewhat obscure as to the consideration of the obligation.
2Cited by13 opinions
- Black River Lumber Co. v. WarnerSupreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- McFadden v. Missouri Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1887
- Tomnitz v. Employers' Liability Assurance Corp.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1938
- Carter v. FosterSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- State ex rel. Little v. DonnellyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1881
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.