Funkhouser v. Ingles
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court, Hon. Ceo. W. Dunn, Judge. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. The main point relied upon in the court below, and upon which the circuit court held the1 petition defective, was that there was no consideration for the alleged undertaking. This would be conceded if this were an action ex contractu. II.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Clinton Circuit Court, Hon. Ceo. W. Dunn, Judge. The facts sufficiently appear in the opinion. I. The main point relied upon in the court below, and upon which the circuit court held the1 petition defective, was that there was no consideration for the alleged undertaking. This would be conceded if this were an action ex contractu. II. Respondent admits by his demurrer: 1. That he promised to file the mortgage for record, to complete and perfect appellant’s security as against the claims of subsequent creditors. 2. That other debts and mortgages on the property, in its full value,…
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Philips, P. J.
As this cause rests wholly upon the sufficiency of the petition, we set it out in full:
"Plaintiffs state that on the 17th day of August, 1880, they executed a note together with one Charles J. Nesbitt, *235for six hundred dollars, payable to the Merchants-National bank at St. Joseph, dne ninety days after date, with interest from maturity at the rate of eight per cent. That plaintiffs executed said note as security and for the accommodation of said Nesbitt, and with the understanding and agreement that said Nesbitt should execute to them a mortgage on a printing' office,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Bryson & Hardin v. PenixSupreme Court of Missouri · 1853
- Wilson v. MilliganSupreme Court of Missouri · 1881
- Persch v. QuiggleSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1868
- Eddy, Jameson & Co. v. Livingston, Kincaid & Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1865
3Cited by1 opinion
- Allgear v. WalshMissouri Court of Appeals · 1887