Legal Opinion

St. Louis National Bank v. Ross

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided December 7, 1880PublishedCited by 7 opinions

Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Thayer, J. Under the Practice Act of this State, a defendant sued upon a contract is not permitted to set up, by way of defence thereto, as distinguished from counter-claim, a claim against the plaintiff for damages for a tort alleged to have been committed by plaintiff in respect of defendant’s property.— Rev. Stats, sects. 3521, 3522; Gordon v. Bruner, 49 Mo. 572 ; McAdow v. Boss, 53 Mo. 203 — 207. Such a claim by defendant as above…

Read the full summary

Appeal from the St. Louis Circuit Court, Thayer, J. Under the Practice Act of this State, a defendant sued upon a contract is not permitted to set up, by way of defence thereto, as distinguished from counter-claim, a claim against the plaintiff for damages for a tort alleged to have been committed by plaintiff in respect of defendant’s property.— Rev. Stats, sects. 3521, 3522; Gordon v. Bruner, 49 Mo. 572 ; McAdow v. Boss, 53 Mo. 203 — 207. Such a claim by defendant as above mentioned is not pleadable as a set-off, not being a debt; a fortiori, it is not equivalent to a plea of payment. —…

1Opinion of the CourtBakewell, J.

This is an action upon five negotiable promissory notes-made by respondent, payable to the order of J. H. Dowell. & Co. The notes were dated at various periods between. September, 1877, and September, 1878; were payable in periods ranging from ninety days to six months, and were-for various amounts, aggregating about $2,800. The petition alleged that these notes were each indorsed and delivered to plaintiff for value before maturity. The answer admitted *402the execution of the notes, but denied all other allegations of the petition, specially that the notes in question were acquired before…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Erie & Pacific Dispatch v. St. Louis Cotton Compress Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1878

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Conrad v. FisherMissouri Court of Appeals · 1889
  2. Alabama State Bank v. BarnesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1886
  3. Stamford Compress Co. v. Farmers' & Merchants' Nat. BankTexas Supreme Court · 1912
  4. Fourth National Bank v. St. Louis Cotton Compress Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1882
  5. United States v. 1364.76875 Wine GallonsDistrict Court, E.D. Missouri · 1945

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API