Legal Opinion

Himmelberger-Harrison Lumber Co. v. Dallas

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided April 2, 1912PublishedCited by 4 opinions

Appeal from Ste. Genevieve Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry G. Riley, Judge (1) The petition contains all the necessary allegations in an action for money had and received, and the matters of inducement contained in the petition only clarify the facts, and are unobjectionable. Creigler v. Duncan, 121 Mo. App. 390; Stout v. Hardware Co., 131 Mo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Ste. Genevieve Circuit Court. — Hon. Henry G. Riley, Judge (1) The petition contains all the necessary allegations in an action for money had and received, and the matters of inducement contained in the petition only clarify the facts, and are unobjectionable. Creigler v. Duncan, 121 Mo. App. 390; Stout v. Hardware Co., 131 Mo. App. 528. (2) The allegation in the petition that the plaintiff was induced to pay this money because of the fraudulent misrepresentations of the defendant does not convert the action from one in assumpsit to one ex delicto. Yeater v. Hines, 24 Mo. App.…

1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.

This is a suit for money had and received. At the conclusion of the evidence for plaintiff, the court instructed a verdict for defendant, on the theory that it conclusively appeared plaintiff had accepted full satisfaction from a joint tortfeasor for the tort out of which the cause of action accrued. Prom this judgment plaintiff prosecutes the appeal.

Plaintiff is an incorporated company, and owns large tracts of timber land in southeast Missouri on *52which it maintains sawmills and manufactures lumber. For about twenty years defendant was in plaintiff’s employ, and a considerable portion of…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Knapp v. . RocheNew York Court of Appeals · 1884
  2. Clifford Banking Co. v. Donovan Commission Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
  3. Crigler v. DuncanMissouri Court of Appeals · 1907
  4. Judd v. WalkerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
  5. Jenkins v. CloptonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. McDonald v. Goddard Grocery Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1914
  2. McKim v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1917
  3. Michael-Swanson-Brady Produce Co. v. Oregon Short Line RailroadMissouri Court of Appeals · 1925
  4. Finlay v. PlanteSuperior Court of Rhode Island · 1932

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

Powered by the Exa API