Legal Opinion

Columbia Incandescent Lamp Co. v. American Electrical Manufacturing Co.

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 10, 1895PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. P. R. Elitoraet, Judge. Defendant’s promise to contribute was without consideration and not enforcible. Anson on Contracts, [2 Am. Ed.], top pp. 90, 100; Philpot v. Griminger, 14 Wall. 570, 577; Bishop on Contracts, secs. 24, 37, 38, 77, 78, 117, 316, 389; Tiedeman on Commercial Paper, sec. 154; Brookes v. Owen, 112 Mo. 251, 261; Railroad v. Morely, 45 Mo. App. 304; Easley v. Gordon, 51 Mo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. P. R. Elitoraet, Judge. Defendant’s promise to contribute was without consideration and not enforcible. Anson on Contracts, [2 Am. Ed.], top pp. 90, 100; Philpot v. Griminger, 14 Wall. 570, 577; Bishop on Contracts, secs. 24, 37, 38, 77, 78, 117, 316, 389; Tiedeman on Commercial Paper, sec. 154; Brookes v. Owen, 112 Mo. 251, 261; Railroad v. Morely, 45 Mo. App. 304; Easley v. Gordon, 51 Mo. App. 637, 641; Wendover v. Baker, 121 Mo. 273, 294; Ling enfelder v. Wainwright Brewing Company, 103 Mo. 578, 595; Clark on Contracts, secs. 65, 73, 86;…

1Opinion of the CourtBond, J.

This is an action upon a bank check drawn on June 15, 1894, by defendant in favor of plaintiff for the sum of $400, payment of .which was refused by the bank, wherefore judgment is demanded against the drawer. The answer admits the execution of the check, and pleads a want of consideration. The plaintiff introduced the check in evidence, and rested. Defendant’s- evidence was that a suit was brought *117against plaintiff for infringement of a patent, wherein a restraining order was made on January 17, 1893, which was rescinded April 21, 1893, after which date defendant agreed to give plaintiff…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. City of St. Louis v. St. Louis Gaslight Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1879
  2. Marks v. Bank of MissouriSupreme Court of Missouri · 1843
  3. Famous Shoe & Clothing Co. v. CrosswhiteSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
  4. Kansas City, St. Joseph & Council Bluffs Railway Co. v. MorleyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
  5. Lancaster v. ElliotMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Cox v. A. P. Green Fire Brick Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1934
  2. Hume v. EagonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1900
  3. Brannock v. MagoonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
  4. Tucker v. DolanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
  5. Miller v. Missouri State Life InsuranceMissouri Court of Appeals · 1916

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API