American Copying Co. v. Muleski
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. — No». O. A. Mosman, Judge. The court erred and abused its discretion, if it had any, in striking from the files the appellant’s amended answer and in refusing to permit him to file amended answer tendered in his “motion for leave to file amended answer,” which set forth good, lawful and legal defenses to the cause of action alleged in plaintiff’s petition.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Buchanan Circuit Court. — No». O. A. Mosman, Judge. The court erred and abused its discretion, if it had any, in striking from the files the appellant’s amended answer and in refusing to permit him to file amended answer tendered in his “motion for leave to file amended answer,” which set forth good, lawful and legal defenses to the cause of action alleged in plaintiff’s petition. The court had ample power after reference, if there could be a reference without an order of record, to permit amendments of pleadings. R. g. 1899, secs. 657, 661, 668; Insurance Co. v. Potter, 4, Mo.…
1Opinion of the CourtEllison, J.
— Plaintiff’s action is for damages for breach of a written contract. The case was referred to a referee, whose findings for plaintiff were approved by the trial court, and judgment accordingly entered.
It appears that defendant, who is a retail butcher in St. Joseph, signed a written instrument whereby he agreed to purchase of plaintiff certain advertising stamps advertising defendant’s business, which were to be given out by defendant to his customers, one for each ten cents’ worth purchased, for which defendant was to pay plaintiff thirty cents per hundred stamps so obtained of plaintiff…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- St. Louis Agricultural & Mechanical Ass'n v. DelanoSupreme Court of Missouri · 1891
- North St. Louis Building & Loan Ass'n v. ObertSupreme Court of Missouri · 1902
- Hart v. Harrison Wire Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- McDearmott v. SedgwickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1897
- Hammerslough v. CheathamSupreme Court of Missouri · 1884
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- England v. HouserMissouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Meredith v. BrockSupreme Court of Missouri · 1929
- Stringer v. Geiser Manufacturing Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1914
- Nelson v. DavenportMontana Supreme Court · 1929
- Riegel v. HolmesClinton County Court of Common Pleas · 1960
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.