Muck v. Hayden
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Pike Circuit Court. —Ron. B. R. Dyer, Judge. The court erred in instructing the jury to find for the plaintiff in the sum of $450 with interest thereon.. The court thereby transcended its judicial rights, and illegally did that which the jury only could do. And this instruction clearly constitutes reversible error. Kroge v. Modem Brotherhood of America, 126 Mo. App. 702; Leder v. Morrow, 132 Mo. App. 443; R. S. 1909, sec. 1993.
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
—This is a suit on a promissory note. Plaintiff recovered and defendant prosecutes the appeal. By his answer defendant admits the execution of the note, but pleads that it was obtained from him through misrepresentations of fact pertaining to the sale of certain shares of stock in a life insurance company for which the note was given. At the conclusion of all of the evidence, the court peremptorily directed a verdict for plaintiff as if the evidence wholly failed to support the fraudulent representations relied upon in the answer.
It appears plaintiff is vice president, of the Mid-Continent…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hewitt v. SteeleSupreme Court of Missouri · 1893
- Moffitt v. HerefordSupreme Court of Missouri · 1896
- Tinker v. KierSupreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Atterberry v. Wabash Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1904
- Reisel v. WinsorMissouri Court of Appeals · 1909
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sunset Acres Motel, Inc. v. JacobsSupreme Court of Missouri · 1960
- Williams v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1930
- Williams v. Commissioner of Internal RevenueCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1930