Ruch v. Jones
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Lazo Commissioner’s Court. This was a suit instituted in the Law Commissioner’s Court on an account for painting and glazing. The defendant Jones in the petition is charged as the debt- or, and the defendant Saugrain as the owner, of the ground or property sought to be charged with the lien of demand.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Lazo Commissioner’s Court. This was a suit instituted in the Law Commissioner’s Court on an account for painting and glazing. The defendant Jones in the petition is charged as the debt- or, and the defendant Saugrain as the owner, of the ground or property sought to be charged with the lien of demand. The answer is a joint answer of both defendants, and puts in issue the indebtedness of defendant Jones to plaintiff and the allegation of notice to defendant Saugrain of plaintiff’s demand prior to filing lien. The answer was sworn to by defendant Jones. Upon this answer,…
1Opinion of the CourtDryden, Judge
The case hardly presents the point the parties wish decid*394ed, which is, whether the joint answer of several co-defendants is not sufficiently verified by the affidavit of one of them. We have no hesitation in answering the question in the affirmative. (Huntington & wife v. House, 22 Mo. 365.)
If the verification had been insufficient, still it was wrong to render judgment by default so long as the answer was on the record. The right practice in such case is to move to strike out the imperfectly verified answer, and after it is thus disposed of, then take the default; but as long as the answer…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Huntington v. HouseSupreme Court of Missouri · 1856
3Cited by5 opinions
- Howland v. ReevesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887
- Lawler v. Bashford-Burmister Co.Arizona Supreme Court · 1896
- Mitchell v. MasonSupreme Court of Florida · 1925
- Halsey v. MeinrathMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
- Smith v. BatemanIllinois Supreme Court · 1875