Matthews v. Coalter
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from Randolph Circuit Court, The appellant insists upon the reversal of the judgment below, upon the following points : 1st. The onus probandi, lies upon the defendant pleading an erasure in his agreement sued upon after signature, to prove it, for the presumption of law is, that such erasure was made before signing, and being an alteration only, made by a stranger, does not avoid it. 2d.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from Randolph Circuit Court, The appellant insists upon the reversal of the judgment below, upon the following points : 1st. The onus probandi, lies upon the defendant pleading an erasure in his agreement sued upon after signature, to prove it, for the presumption of law is, that such erasure was made before signing, and being an alteration only, made by a stranger, does not avoid it. 2d. That the declaration of persons in possession of the writing sued on, made out of the presence of the party to be charged, is no part of the res gestee, is hearsay, and illegal evidence. 3d. That all…
1Opinion of the CourtNaptqn, J.
This was a suit before a justice of the peace of Randolph county, brought by Henry Matthews against Sterling Coalter, upon the following agreement: “We the undersigned do agree to pay the sum of one dollar for all wolves that is killed by any of said assignors if the wolf is started m fifteen miles of Green Moore’s for twelve months from this date. All persons must assign this subscription within four months. January 29, 1841;” which was signed by said' Coaltor, and said Matthews, and several others. Immediately after the word “miles,” appeared written the word “square,” with a black line…
2Cited by10 opinions
- Kelly v. ThueySupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Paramore v. LindseySupreme Court of Missouri · 1876
- State v. CottrillWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1888
- State ex rel. Jackson County v. ChickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Otten v. OttenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1941
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.