Costello v. Fesler
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Gentry Circuit Court. — Hon. O. A. Anthony, Judge; (1) The court erred in refusing to permit defendant to introduce the evidence of Frank Jones, to prove the allegations in the second defense of the answer. Ern v. Rubinstein, 72 Mo. App. 337; Hamilton v. Marks, 63 Mo. 167. (2) The court erred in refusing to give defendant’s demurrer at the close of plaintiff’s evidence.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Gentry Circuit Court. — Hon. O. A. Anthony, Judge; (1) The court erred in refusing to permit defendant to introduce the evidence of Frank Jones, to prove the allegations in the second defense of the answer. Ern v. Rubinstein, 72 Mo. App. 337; Hamilton v. Marks, 63 Mo. 167. (2) The court erred in refusing to give defendant’s demurrer at the close of plaintiff’s evidence. If the evidence would not support a verdict for plaintiff, then the demurrer should have been given. No proof whatever of indorsement had been made. Bank v. Pennington, 42 Mo. App. 355; Worrell v. Roberts, 58…
1Opinion of the CourtGill, J.
Plaintiff sued the defendant to recover on two promissory notes — one for $1,750 executed by defendant to the Stanberry Normal School Association, and by it indorsed to plaintiff, the other for $115 executed by defendant to the Bank of Stanberry and in like manner indorsed to plaintiff. There wa's no real controversy as to the smaller note, but as to the note for $1,750, the answer, while admitting its execution, interposed a general denial and pleaded some other defenses relating principally to a want of consideration. At the close of the entire evidence, the court, at plaintiff’s request,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Brand v. CannonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Epstein v. Hammerslough Clothing Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1896
- Banister v. KentonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1891
3Cited by1 opinion
- Wm. Deering & Co. v. HannahMissouri Court of Appeals · 1902