Meyer v. Witter
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. I. Under the issues and the instructions of the court below, the allowance of the defendant’s offset depended upon the proof of the fact of partnership between the plaintiff and Bibliographic Institute of Hildburgliausen, and it was therefore error in the court to exclude any evidence tending to prove that fact.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis Court of Common Pleas. I. Under the issues and the instructions of the court below, the allowance of the defendant’s offset depended upon the proof of the fact of partnership between the plaintiff and Bibliographic Institute of Hildburgliausen, and it was therefore error in the court to exclude any evidence tending to prove that fact. The identity of the publication was established by the testimony of Schuster, and there being evidence offered by the defendant tending to show that Meyer was one of the publishers, the translation from the prospectus ought to have gone to…
1Opinion of the CourtHyland, Judge
This was an action brought by Meyer to recover of defendant Witter the sum of seven hundred and sixty-four dollars and thirty-two cents, alleged to be due from Witter to plaintiff, on account of goods, wares and merchandise sold and delivered by plaintiff to Witter at his request. A particular statement of the account is filed with the petition, showing debits, and credited with the amount of 11806 43. The debts amounted to $2570 75 — leaving a balance due to plaintiff of the sum of $764 32.
The answer of Witter denies all indebtedness ; and he also pleaded a set-off due to him by a firm of…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Gerhard & Hey Co. v. United StatesUnited States Customs Court · 1943
- Montemayor e Hijos v. United StatesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- United States v. Sanders Mfg. Co.United States Customs Court · 1939