Merkle v. Powe
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. George H. Williams, Judge. (1) When a pleading does not comply with the requirements of the statute as to setting forth the items of the account, or attaching the bill of items thereto, the adverse party may either move to have it made more definite or at the trial object to the introduction of any evidence in support of it.
Read the full summary
Appeal from St. Louis City Circuit Court. — Hon. George H. Williams, Judge. (1) When a pleading does not comply with the requirements of the statute as to setting forth the items of the account, or attaching the bill of items thereto, the adverse party may either move to have it made more definite or at the trial object to the introduction of any evidence in support of it. The plaintiffs in this case were given an opportunity to make a second amendment, but elected to stand on the petition as first amended. Dawson v. Quillen, 61 Mo. App. 676‘. (2) The petition as amended did not conform to…
1Opinion of the CourtReynolds, P. J.
Plaintiffs in their petition in this case set out that at a time named, one Daniel had sold and delivered certain lumber to defendant for the sum of $1857.53'; that thereafter Daniel -assigned for value received his account against defendant to plaintiffs, of which defendant was duly notified; that a bill itemizing the lumber so sold and delivered by Daniel to defendant is filed with the petition and marked as Exhibits ‘ ‘ A and B; ” that the lumber was sold for cash and the purchase price became immediately due and payable upon delivery and that plaintiffs having-demanded of defendant…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Harford v. BoyesMissouri Court of Appeals · 1894
- Mangelsdorf Bros. v. Harnden Seed Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1908
3Cited by1 opinion
- Banner Lumber Co. v. RobsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914