McCarty v. O'Bryan
Supreme Court of Missouri
Certified from Kansas City Court of Appeals. (1) The court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that plaintiff could not recover because the law under which plaintiff sues was unconstitutional and void. State v. Loomis, 115 Mo. 307; also, San Antonio & A. P. B’y Co. v. Wilson, Central Law Journal, Yol. 35, issue No. 13, 212. (2) The court should have awarded defendant a new trial, because it had refused said instruction.
Read the full summary
Certified from Kansas City Court of Appeals. (1) The court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that plaintiff could not recover because the law under which plaintiff sues was unconstitutional and void. State v. Loomis, 115 Mo. 307; also, San Antonio & A. P. B’y Co. v. Wilson, Central Law Journal, Yol. 35, issue No. 13, 212. (2) The court should have awarded defendant a new trial, because it had refused said instruction. (3) The court erred in overruling defendant’s motion in arrest because of its refusal of said instruction.
1Opinion of the CourtGantt, J.
This suit was begun before E. P. Yanáman, Esq., a justice of the peace within and for Metz township, Yernon county, Missouri. The complaint is in these words (omitting caption): “Plaintiff complains and alleges: That at the times hereinafter mentioned the defendants were partners doing business under the style and firm of Wm. O’Bryan & Company and as such partners are, and were at the times hereinafter mentioned, mine operators, mining and operating in coal at or near the town of Carbon *586Center, in the township of Osage, Vernon county, Missouri. That plaintiff, at the special instance and…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Sweet v. MaupinSupreme Court of Missouri · 1877
- Tetherow v. St. Joseph & Des Moines RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1888
- Alexander v. RelfeSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Drey v. DoyleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1889
- Hall v. HallSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. v. HillMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Saxton National Bank v. BennettSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Garnett & Allen Paper Co. v. Midland Publishing Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Green v. Supreme Lodge National Reserve Ass'nMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
- Warren v. Badger Lead & Zinc Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1914
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.