Biddle v. Boyce
Supreme Court of Missouri
ERROR TO ST. LOUIS CIRCUIT COURT. The plaintiff had a right of action, cither of assumpsit or trespass, under the old system. It matters not which of these forms of action be judged most appropriate. It is submitted that either of them could be sustained by the evidence, but if either one of them be so, the the petition is good.
Read the full summary
ERROR TO ST. LOUIS CIRCUIT COURT. The plaintiff had a right of action, cither of assumpsit or trespass, under the old system. It matters not which of these forms of action be judged most appropriate. It is submitted that either of them could be sustained by the evidence, but if either one of them be so, the the petition is good. If the facts stated in the petition be 'such as would support a petition, drawn so as to conform to the views entertained by the counsel for the defendant, then the petition demurred to is good, and the judgment of the court below is erroneous and should be reversed.…
1Opinion of the CourtRyland, J.
This is a proceeding under the new law reforming the pleadings and practice in courts of justice in Missouri. The plaintiff filed his petition in the Circuit Court of St. Louis county, as follows : The plaintiff states that he is the owner and proprietor of a lot of ground in the city of St. Louis and State of Missouri, described as lot number six (6) in block one hundred and forty-five, situated on the west side of Sixth street, between Carr and Biddle streets, having thirty-two feet seven inches in front by one hundred and twenty-five feet in depth, to an alley twenty feet wide, on which…
2Cited by4 opinions
- State ex rel. Bartley v. FletcherSupreme Court of Missouri · 1867
- Gruender v. FrankSupreme Court of Missouri · 1916
- Curry v. CablissSupreme Court of Missouri · 1866
- Gamage v. BushellMissouri Court of Appeals · 1876