Gloeckner v. Kittlaus
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Now. John W. McElhinney, Judge. (1) The answer admitted every material fact necessary to establish a constructive trust, but set up certain facts by way of avoidance that if true would not change the relationship or status of the parties, nor excuse in law or equity the acts of defendant Kittlaus in violating his duty to his friend. If his conduct is conscionable in equity, we fail to see it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis County Circuit Court. — Now. John W. McElhinney, Judge. (1) The answer admitted every material fact necessary to establish a constructive trust, but set up certain facts by way of avoidance that if true would not change the relationship or status of the parties, nor excuse in law or equity the acts of defendant Kittlaus in violating his duty to his friend. If his conduct is conscionable in equity, we fail to see it. The court should have given judgment on the pleadings. Dezell v. Fidelity Co., 176 Mo. 253; Lang v. Lang, 79 Mo. 644. (2) Any agreement or contract in…
1Opinion of the CourtMarshall, J.
This is a proceeding in equity to set aside a conveyance of fourteen and fifteen one-hundredths acres of land in St. Louis county, from the defendant Kittlaus to the defendant Wittich; and to declare the defendant Kittlaus a trustee for the plaintiff for an undivided five-sevenths interest in the land; and to charge the two-sevenths interest remaining .in Kittlaus with a lien for five-sevenths of $165, received by Kittlaus for the condemnation of one and fifteen one-*482hundredths acres for a railroad right of way, and for a partition, and sale of the land, and a division of the proceeds among…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Ivey v. TeichmanCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1917