Fritsch v. Heislen
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The appellants contended that the¡ note was made and the contract of appellants was completed on Sunday, and that the contract is void — Ri C. 1855, p.630, § 33 ; 2 Pars. Cont. 262, see note and cases cited.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Circuit Court. The appellants contended that the¡ note was made and the contract of appellants was completed on Sunday, and that the contract is void — Ri C. 1855, p.630, § 33 ; 2 Pars. Cont. 262, see note and cases cited. By the evidence in the case, it appears that the appellants and respondent met on Sunday, the 8th of March, at the house of the appellant Stocke, for the purpose of securing a loan from Eritsch to Heislen; that the parties then and there agreed upon a loan and the terms of the loan, and then and there executed the note in suit. It matters not that the…
1Opinion of the CourtFagg, Judge
This suit was determined in the S't. Lours Circuit Court, and was instituted' upon a promissory note for the sum of three hundred dollars. The note was dated March 8, 1862, and payable twelve months after date, with ten per cent, interest.
The main ground relied upon for a reversal of the judgment in this case is the fact that the note was executed on Sunday and that the contract is therefore void. It appears that these parties met on Sunday, at the house of plaintiff, and concluded an agreement, by which the latter was to loan the defendant Heislen the sum of money mentioned, upon a note…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Luebbering v. OberkoetterMissouri Court of Appeals · 1876
- Reithmuller v. Fire Ass'nMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
- Wells, Fargo & Co. v. VansickleU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Nevada · 1894
- Rosenblatt v. TownsleySupreme Court of Missouri · 1881