Hitt v. Hitt
Missouri Court of Appeals
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Court.— Hon. Henry G. Riley} Judge. (1) If the objection of defendant to the admissibility of the will had been sustained and its ex parte statements excluded, there would have remained absolutely no evidence of the execution or existence of any note or indebtedness and the demurrer to the evidence would necesarily have been sustained.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Court.— Hon. Henry G. Riley} Judge. (1) If the objection of defendant to the admissibility of the will had been sustained and its ex parte statements excluded, there would have remained absolutely no evidence of the execution or existence of any note or indebtedness and the demurrer to the evidence would necesarily have been sustained. (2) Statements or declarations not made in the presence of or authorized by the party to be affected are hearsay unless they are such as constitute parts of the res gestae. Coole v. McDaniel, 33 Mo. 363; Fougue v. Burgess, 71…
1Opinion of the CourtNortoni, J.
This is a suit on a promissory note. Plaintiff recovered and defendant prosecutes the appeal.
Plaintiff is executor of the last will of Samuel Hitt, deceased. The petition counts on a promissory *634note of seven hundred and thirty dollars at eight per cent, interest, alleged to have been executed by defendant to said Samuel Hitt in 1893. Among other things, it is alleged in the petition that defendant, who is the widow of Samuel Hitt, has possession of the note and for that reason plaintiff executor is unable to file it as an exhibit with the petition. Besides a general denial, the answer set…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Gannon v. Laclede Gas Light Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- James v. Mutual Reserve Fund Life Ass'nSupreme Court of Missouri · 1899
- Rothrock v. Cordz-Fisher Lumber Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1898
- Frye v. St. Louis, Iron Mountain & Southern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Missouri · 1906
- Klockenbrink v. St. Louis & Meramec River RailroadSupreme Court of Missouri · 1903
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- First Bank & Tr. Co., Etc., Extr. v. TellsonIndiana Court of Appeals · 1954
- Battles v. United Railways Co. of St LouisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1913
- Dayton Folding Box Co. v. DancigerMissouri Court of Appeals · 1911
- Ford v. DahlSupreme Court of Missouri · 1950
- Haines v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific RailwayMissouri Court of Appeals · 1916
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.