Legal Opinion
Sheffield v. Balmer
Supreme Court of Missouri
Decided March 15, 1873PublishedCited by 8 opinions
Appeal from Louis Circuit Court. The contract sued upon did not contemplate the doing of any act prohibited by Section 35, Chap. 206, Gr. S. 1865. This was a contract for the sale of merchandise on Sunday (Smith vs. Wilcox, 24 N. T. 353).
1Opinion of the CourtTories, Judge
This action was brought before a justice of the peace. The action was founded on the following agreement.
“St. Louis, November 24th, 1868. We agree to pay Sheffield, Eaton & Stone, publishers St. Louis Home Journal, five dollars per issue for publishing a one hundred (1-3 column) line advertisement for us in their weekly (Sunday) edition every Sunday for one year; said advertisement to be changed at our option. Balmer & Weber.”
The plain tiffs recovered a judgment before the justice for one hundred and fifty-five dollars; from this judgment defendants appealed to the St. Louis Circuit Court. In…
2Cited by8 opinions
- Mooney v. Mooney Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1912
- Pulitzer Publishing Co. v. McNicholsMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Armour & Co. v. JesmerWashington Supreme Court · 1913
- Roth v. HaxMissouri Court of Appeals · 1897
- Publishers George Knapp & Co. v. CulbertsonMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.