Home Mutual Insurance v. Bauman
Supreme Court of Missouri
APPEAL from the St. Louis Circuit Court. 1.The judge of Ihe circuit court erred in refusing to grant plaintiffs a new trial on the merits by a jury, upon the dissolution of the injunction. The plaintiffs were entitled to a jury by the constitution of this State; and to a trial on the merits under the practice m chan* eery after the dissolution. IÍ.
Read the full summary
APPEAL from the St. Louis Circuit Court. 1.The judge of Ihe circuit court erred in refusing to grant plaintiffs a new trial on the merits by a jury, upon the dissolution of the injunction. The plaintiffs were entitled to a jury by the constitution of this State; and to a trial on the merits under the practice m chan* eery after the dissolution. IÍ. The judge erred in assessing the damages on the dissolution of the injunction, without a jury, the plaintiffs having demanded a jury. Art. 9 and 12. III. The judge eired in refusing to allow the amendment of plaintiff’s petition. Ait. II, § 3 and…
1Opinion of the CourtRyland, J.
This was a petition under the act concerning practice in courts of justice. The object was to set aside an adjustment of a loss by fire on a policy of insurance, and to vacate an order for $4200, given upon the adjustment. An injunction was granted restraining the negotiation ol the or 'e?’, &c.
The detVndant answered.
A motion was made by the defendant to dissolve the injunction. The court below sustained the motion, and assessed the damages without a jury, although one was demanded by the petitioner below. The couri then dismissed the petition, although the plaintifF demanded a trial bj jury…
2Cited by1 opinion
- Hartman v. McFaddenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1984