Baughman v. National, Waterworks Co.
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. Jno. W. Henry, Judge. (1) It was competent for the jury to find for the defendant upon one count and for the plaintiff upon the other counts of the petition. Consequently, it was also competent for the court to sustain the defendant’s motion for a new trial as to the counts upon which the verdict was adverse to it, leaving the verdict upon the first count in full force.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the Jackson Circuit Court. — Hon. Jno. W. Henry, Judge. (1) It was competent for the jury to find for the defendant upon one count and for the plaintiff upon the other counts of the petition. Consequently, it was also competent for the court to sustain the defendant’s motion for a new trial as to the counts upon which the verdict was adverse to it, leaving the verdict upon the first count in full force. The finding upon each of the counts must be considered by itself. Error which induced a given finding on one count furnished no authority for setting aside the verdicts on other…
1Opinion of the CourtSmith, P. J.
Plaintiff sued defendant and stated her complaints in a petition containing four counts. The result of the trial of the issues was the following verdict: “We, the jury, find for the defendant on the first count in the sum of $125,- without interest; and we find for the plaintiff on the second count in the sum of $300, and on the third count the sum of $150, and *580on the fourth count the sum of $500, and an additional amount of $250, and that the defendant pay all costs.”'
Afterwards, within four days, the defendant filed a motion for new trial on the second, third and fourth counts. Plaintiff…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Bindbeutal v. Street Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1891
- Lovell v. DavisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1893
3Cited by2 opinions
- Nulton v. CroskeyMissouri Court of Appeals · 1905
- Warren v. CowdenMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912