Legal Opinion

Phillips v. Thompson

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided February 16, 1931PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

This is an action to recover the hire of a rock crusher. Plaintiff had judgment for $325. Defendant duly appealed and claims, among other alleged errors, that plaintiff recovered upon a theory and cause of action other than that stated in the petition; that the case was improperly submitted upon instructions given; that defendant's instructions were erroneously refused; and that the court erred in admitting incompetent evidence.

For a proper understanding of the case and of some of the questions raised we deem it advisable to set forth the petition, the substance of the answer, and the main…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Degonia v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1909
  2. State ex rel. Central Coal & Coke Co. v. EllisonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1917
  3. Kuhlman v. Water, Light & Transit Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1925
  4. Barrick Kentucky Oil & Gas Co. v. ScrivnerCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1929
  5. Buffum v. F. W. Woolworth Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1925

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Gover v. ClevelandMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
  2. Arkansas-Missouri Power Corp. v. City of PotosiSupreme Court of Missouri · 1946
  3. Robertson v. Vandalia Trust Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1934
  4. King v. GuyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957
  5. King v. GuyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API