Legal Opinion

Kelchner v. Morris

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided May 16, 1898PublishedCited by 5 opinions

Appeal from the Jackson Circtiit Court. — Hon. James Hibson, Special Judge. (1) “The court erred in holding that the defendant was estopped from settingup his defense in this case, this case having originated in the justice court.” Ridgley v. Stillwell, 28 Mo. 403; Willis v. Stevens, 24 Mo. App. 503'; Hicks v. Martin, 25 Mo. App. 367. (2) There could be no ratification of the note sued upon in this case. Eerry v. Taylor, 33 Mo. 334; Shisler v. Van-Hike, 92 Pa.

Read the full summary

Appeal from the Jackson Circtiit Court. — Hon. James Hibson, Special Judge. (1) “The court erred in holding that the defendant was estopped from settingup his defense in this case, this case having originated in the justice court.” Ridgley v. Stillwell, 28 Mo. 403; Willis v. Stevens, 24 Mo. App. 503'; Hicks v. Martin, 25 Mo. App. 367. (2) There could be no ratification of the note sued upon in this case. Eerry v. Taylor, 33 Mo. 334; Shisler v. Van-Hike, 92 Pa. St. 447; McHugh v. Schuylkill, 67 Pa. St. 391; Workman v. Right, 33 Ohio St. '405; Hammerslaugh v. Cheatham, 84 Mo. 22. (1) Appellant…

1Opinion of the Court

Smith, P: J. —

This suit was commenced before a justice of the peace on a promissory note for $150 made by defendant to Van Prather, and by him for value assigned to, plaintiff. The defendant on his oath denied the execution of the note. There was a trial in the circuit court where the cause had been removed by appeal in which plaintiff had judgment and the defendant appealed. It is in effect conceded that the evidence adduced by the plaintiff was sufficient to establish his prima facie right of recovery. The defendant testified that the note was a forgery. That his name has been signed…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hammerslough v. CheathamSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
  2. Sandige v. HillMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
  3. Ferry v. TaylorSupreme Court of Missouri · 1863
  4. Phillips v. BurrowsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1896

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Prugh, Combest & Land v. Linwood State BankMissouri Court of Appeals · 1951
  2. Broughton Bros. v. SumnerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1899
  3. Pitman v. 16 To 1 Mining Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1899
  4. Anderson v. Middle States Utilities Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1936
  5. Harris v. TinderMissouri Court of Appeals · 1904

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API